Deborah Fritz said:
>A change in Expression data in a MARC Bib >record means a change in
>Expression when we get the data out of MARC and into ... whatever.
The only "whatever" on the horizon is Bibframe. Like MARC, Bibframe
has no expression record. I suspect expression data in Bibframe will
b
Just to clarify, our MARC Bib records are not strictly Manifestation
records, they are compilations of Manifestation data + Work data +
Expression data crammed into single record. Unfortunate, but what we are
stuck with for the time being. A change in Expression data in a MARC Bib
record means a c
Thomas Meehan asked:
>1. Which (or how many) statements of responsibility are to be regarde=
>d as core.
The first only. But I suspect most will record all, or at least the first
person in each grouping, as well as trace them.
>2. Statements of responsibility naming more than three
Deborah Fritzs said:
>In the meantime, if we are making RDA records, then we have to use the RDA
>elements in the way that RDA defines them; just as we have to (if only it
>were true) use MARC elements the way that MARC defines those elements.
RDA has so many options, and so many fuzzy direction
Tom,
One of the changes in the May 14 release of the RDA Toolkit will be a
revision of the core statement at 2.4 to add information there that is now
at 2.4.2:
"Statement of responsibility relating to title proper is a core element (if
more than one, only the first recorded is required). Other s
Dear all,
This is a fairly novice question but one where I would welcome some
clarification, especially as far as the RDA text goes. Apologies if this has
been raised before (I'm sure it must have been). I am looking at a couple of
contentious aspects of the statement of responsibility relating
We have no way of knowing, yet, what Bibframe will end up as--it is still
very much a work in progress, Thomas shows with the addition of
"hasExpression" and "expressionOf".
In the meantime, if we are making RDA records, then we have to use the RDA
elements in the way that RDA defines them; just
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
> Sent: May-09-13 9:10 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Recording alternate content and physical for
I think you have it correct. However, when it comes to RDA, I am far
from a "specialist." :-)
Carolyn Phillips
Cataloging Specialist
Grand Rapids Public Library
111 Library St
Grand Rapids, MI 49503
cphill...@grpl.org
On 5/10/2013 9:11 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote [in part]:
Which leads me to
Thank you. Heidrun.
Good explanation!
Thanks again,
Joan Wang
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller <
wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de> wrote:
> Joan,
>
> perhaps it helps if you compare this to the rules for statements of
> responsibility. In 2.4.1.6 we read: "If there is more
Joan,
perhaps it helps if you compare this to the rules for statements of
responsibility. In 2.4.1.6 we read: "If there is more than one statement
of responsibility, record the statements in the order indicated by the
sequence, layout, or typography of the source of information (...)."
Again
Sorry, for $a in 260 fields, probably no need for omission indication. If I
understand 2.8.2.4 correctly, it tells us to transcribe more than one place
in an order rather than the first one and picking up whatever we want.
Unless there is an in-house guideline.
On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Jo
3. do anything in between, i.e. record the first one and one or more of the
others
Does 2.8.2.4 tell us that? Ignore whatever we want and no indication? I
thought that RDA or LCPS would explicitly state that.
*If more than one place of publication is named on the source of
information, record the
On 10/05/2013 00:21, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> Festshrift codes, no. I didn't mean ALL of the data, indeed.
>
> Format/genre/medium/carrier info? Such as in leader bytes 6-7, field
> 007, and now the 336/337/338? Absolutely.
>
> I am not saying that ALL the info in the MARC record is equally
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
