Mac said:
I would consider architectural drawings to be plans, not maps,
regardless of scale. Maps usually depict the earth's surface. There
are also maps of the moon, and of fictitious places, etc.
Yes, but not all architectural drawings are plans (e.g. if the drawing
shows the front of a
Hi everyone!
I had a very similar case yesterday: a book containing solely illustrations.
Some of the illustrations had colour, but most of them were bw. Since we
cannot refer to the illustration in 300$b (RDA defines it as « secondary
content »), I wasn't sure how to record the information...
Hi!
I think it is extremely confusing because, under 3.4.4, still image includes
paintings (without specifying what the carrier must be), while under 3.5.3, the
rule for dimensions only applies to documents on sheet (therefore, I assume a
painting on canvas, a fresco on plaster slab or an
Whaha! I am reading my mails backwards and just noticed you already mentionned
the confusion between carrier and content :)
Marie-Chantal L'Ecuyer-Coelho
Bibliothécaire
Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales
Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
2275, rue
Shahrzad
do [between 2000 and 2013?]
in FF
008/06 Type of date
q
008/07-10
2000
008/11-14
2013
For call number, between 2000 and 2013, use 2000. Is that LC policy?
Joan
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Khosrowpour, Shahrzad
shahrzad.khosrowp...@colostate-pueblo.edu wrote:
Oh,
I did
Heidrun said:
I think we'll have to discuss that for the German application. Judging
from the discussion here and some examples I've seen, I'm not so sure
this rule has been universally followed (although I see your point).
Even the AACR2 glossary does not have a definition of photograph.
Hi again!
I don't think I would write up a content note in 520 since in 336 the content
type is clearly defined as still image. Now, for « normal » still images (i.e.
pictures on a sheet of paper or other 2D carrier), we never include terms like
« ill. » or « images » since it would be
Adam,
[not after August 15, 2013] seems reasonable.
What would be the DtSt code and date at FF, if I use $c [not after August 15,
2013]
Thanks-- Shahrzad
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[not after August 15, 2013] seems reasonable.
[before August 2013] would be shorter. Why be negative? It probably
took two weeks for the item to reach you, so I would not worry about
the 15th.
Seems to me RDA often uses a phrase where a word would suffice.
We would still prefer guessing the
Marie-Chantal (what a pretty name) said:
we never include terms like « ill. » or « images » since it would be
redundant to say an image is illustrated!
You are assuming that 336 displays. If it displays, I've not so far
seen it in brief display. The 300 collation should be understandable
on
Just to be a carmudgeon about this. Those 3XX fields are very structured
and may not immediately understandable to the patron.
So I would include illustration in the 360, since this written in much
more straightforward English.
On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 12:02 PM, L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal
11 matches
Mail list logo
