RDA and MARC always seem to be slightly out of step with each other, I
think this is part of the issue.
MARC is ambiguous in that it has a specific subfield for related
countries ($c), but the definition of $f allows associated places at any
level. $f purports to be for Other or additional
10.09.2012 21:31, Adam L. Schiff:
... It does
concern me that sometimes an associated place will go in $e and
other times in $f. Without clear definitions of these subfields, I
don't see how a machine would know how to create an access point on
the fly for display. But perhaps that isn't a
Richard,
There is no current place in MARC to separately record the element Number
of a Conference. While I've been informed by John Attig that that was a
deliberate decision not to propose a field for that bit of data, I hope
that there will be a separate place for it when we move to the
NISO Publishes Themed Issue of Information Standards Quarterly on Linked
Data for Libraries, Archives, and Museums
Contributed articles illustrate both challenges and innovations in
implementing linked data
The National Information Standards Organization (NISO) announces the
publication of a
I would transcribe it as: New York : Vintage Books.
Vintage Books is an established corporate body name. Vintage Departures
seems to be something else instead of the corporate body name.
Thanks,
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Snow, Karen
RDA Toolkit says this information goes in the 260 field, but this isn't the
first time I've seen the 264 field used. Could someone please clarify?
Thanks,
Pamela Withrow
Cataloger
Perma-Bound Books
Jacksonville, IL 62650
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Snow, Karen ks...@dom.edu wrote:
I am
Vintage departures is considered a series: http://lccn.loc.gov/n86714686
--
John Hostage
Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Cambridge, MA 02138
host...@law.harvard.edu
How are others handling the documentation of local decisions and policies for
RDA?
I seem to recall a very handy tool in an earlier incarnation of LC Cataloger's
Desktop, that allowed for placement of sticky notes that could be shared
across an institutional copy of Desktop. This was a really
Hello, Pamela!
LC announced the implementation of the 264 MARC field in June. The last
time I looked, OCLC still had nothing about it, but you can get the basic
layout at:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html
264 requires a second indicator, usually #1 (publication) and/or #4
I noticed today that under “Tools-Options” you can now select RDA templates.
260 now become 26X.
Guy Frost, B.M.E., M.M.E., M.L.S., Ed.S
Catalog Librarian/Facilitator of Technical Processing
Associate Professor of Library Science
Odum Library, Valdosta State University
Valdosta, GA
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:26 PM, Snow, Karen ks...@dom.edu wrote:
I am trying to determine what to transcribe in 264$b for the following
publication information (on the title page of the work):
Vintage Departures
Vintage Books
A Division of Random House, Inc.
New York
Hi Karen
It is my
My comments interspersed below. --Adam
On Tue, 11 Sep 2012, Buzz Haughton wrote:
Hello, Pamela!
LC announced the implementation of the 264 MARC field in June. The last time I
looked, OCLC still had nothing about
it, but you can get the basic layout at:
Thank you so much, Robert! (and everyone else who responded to my email). I
noticed that option at 2.8.1.4, but didn't connect the dots to what I was
doing. Since Vintage Departures is a series statement (thanks John Hostage) and
I have the option of omitting Random House, it makes sense to
What Robert said is true, but there is an LCPS for 2.8.1.4 that says:
LC practice for Optional omission: Generally do not omit levels in
corporate hierarchy.
So LC catalogers will generally transcribe the publisher statement as
found in a resource. The PCC practice for this omission has not
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Snow, Karen ks...@dom.edu wrote:
Thank you so much, Robert! (and everyone else who responded to my email).
I noticed that option at 2.8.1.4, but didn't connect the dots to what I was
doing. Since Vintage Departures is a series statement (thanks John Hostage)
Pam Withrow asked:
RDA Toolkit says this information goes in the 260 field, but this isn't the
first time I've seen the 264 field used. Could someone please clarify?
According to PCC, all new RDA records should have 264, not 260; field
264 had not been extablished during the test period.
Since
How are others handling the documentation of local decisions and policies
for RDA?
The MRIs* plus client procedures.
http://special-cataloguing.com/mris
See also:
http://special-cataloguing.com/node/1397
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special
Mac Elrod wrote:
How are others handling the documentation of local decisions and
policies
for RDA?
The MRIs* plus client procedures.
http://special-cataloguing.com/mris
See also:
http://special-cataloguing.com/node/1397
I guess what I'm really after are nifty ideas for doing the
Might you use the workflows?
Adolfo R. Tarango
Head - UC Systemwide Collection Services
atara...@ucsd.edumailto:atara...@ucsd.edu
858-822-3594
[cid:image001.png@01CD877F.99FB9310]
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
19 matches
Mail list logo
