I believe the LC PCC PS for 1.7.1 (the section on end punctuation of variable fields) does allow the cataloger to avoid the absurdity of adding an additional period when the edition statement ends with an abbreviation. I've often wondered why we can leave off the brackets in 240 or "ISSN" in the 490 but are still expected to account for the area full stop in MARC records. Does it say something about MARC or ISBD that programmers can't seem to come up with a decent solution to this egregious time waster? John Hostage's explanation is similar to what I tell trainees; it will get harder as the ISBD catalog card model becomes incomprehensible to the generations who only know the online catalogs. Maybe Bibframe will be the future ISBD, based on a different model?
Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training & Documentation Catalog & Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edu -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 4:02 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Use of ISBD punctuation with RDA. And a workshop. Fox, Chris <c...@byui.edu> wrote: > I had forgotten the whole "double punctuation" thing, and hadn't been doing > that up to now. It still looks weird to me. If our patrons even notice, I > imagine it will look even weirder to them. A bit of context: I created the cheat-sheet to give copy catalogers an idea of what they might encounter with RDA records rather than to provide a "how to" for original catalogers. As I mention during training, I don't worry too much about the double-punctuation. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>
