Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-26 Thread Ford Davey
. -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: 25 May 2013 18:31 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3 Ford, RDA

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-26 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
. -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller Sent: 25 May 2013 18:31 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3 Ford, RDA

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-25 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Gene, You know, can we just record what is actually in the item, instead of inventing things (note phrase cited above. Who writes like that?) Inventions of what things should be go back to pre-AACR2 rules. Do we want to go there? I'm not sure I get your meaning. I believe RDA _does_ indeed

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-25 Thread Ford Davey
] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3 Gene, You know, can we just record what is actually in the item, instead of inventing things (note phrase cited above. Who writes like that?) Inventions of what things should be go back to pre-AACR2 rules. Do we want to go there? I'm not sure I get your

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-25 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3 Gene, You know, can we just record what is actually in the item, instead of inventing things (note phrase cited above. Who writes like that?) Inventions of what things should be go back to pre-AACR2 rules. Do we want to go

[RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Michael Chopey
I'm confused about the capitalization of the examples in 2.5.6.3 (Recording Designations of a Named Revision of an Edition). This rule and its examples came over from AACR2 mostly untouched (the phrase designation of replaces AACR2's statement relating to ... and that's about it), except that

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Joan Wang
I look at A.5 about the capitalization of edition statement. It says to capitalize the first word or abbreviation of the first word in a designation edition. It also refers to 2.5.2. It does not indicate 2.5.6 Designation of a Named Revision of an Edition. So I assume that we do not have to

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
I agree with Joan. The rules about capitalization are in appendix A, and A.5 only tells us to capitalize the element designation of edition, but not the element designation of a named revision of an edition (which, personally, I find a rather odd element, by the way). I think there is simply a

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Joan Wang
/ Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Michael Chopey Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 01:48 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3 I'm confused about the capitalization of the examples in 2.5.6.3 (Recording

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller
John Hostage wrote: There is also this example in 2.5.1.4: World's classics ed., New ed. rev. Oddly, this example is almost identical to one in 2.5.6.3 (Recordingdesignations of a named revision of an edition): new edition, revised, reset, and illustrated Designation of edition: World's

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Joan Wang
Great! Heidrun. These examples should be reexamined. Thanks, Joan Wang On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote: John Hostage wrote: There is also this example in 2.5.1.4: World's classics ed., New ed. rev. Oddly, this example is

Re: [RDA-L] Question about examples in 2.5.6.3

2013-05-24 Thread Gene Fieg
You know, can we just record what is actually in the item, instead of inventing things (note phrase cited above. Who writes like that?) Inventions of what things should be go back to pre-AACR2 rules. Do we want to go there? On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Joan Wang