al Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas
Sent: 25 October 2012 23:27
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] "Main entry" in RDA
Good point, and the LC-
ccess / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E.
> Sent: October 25, 2012 6:08 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] "Main entry" in RDA
>
> J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> > In RDA it is required to
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> In RDA it is required to transcribe and trace only one.
To be accurate, RDA requires transcribing the *first* statement of
responsibility, not the first name therein.
... / written by X ; illustrated by Y ; edited by Z.
"Written by X" is the bare minimum (RDA's "core") f
On 22/10/2012 23:41, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> I see no advantage in combining 100/240 or 100/245 in nuMARC. They
> only need to be combined in 600 and 700.
>
> In new title lists we print, we give the 100 once, with 245s after in
> alphabetic order. I see no need to repeat the 100 in print or OPA
Thomas Brenndorfer said:
>In RDA, if there are four creators listed in the statement of
>responsibility, the first would go in a 100 and the rest in 700
>fields. In AACR2, because of the rule of three, the first listed
>would go in a 700 field and the rest would be dropped. That's one
>significant
5 matches
Mail list logo
