Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
The other day, we were wondering how habilitation theses should be treated
under RDA. These are quite common in Germany. In case you're not familiar
with this European concept: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habilitation
I don't have
Finnerty, Ryan rfinne...@ucsd.edu wrote:
What if you have an entity that has multiple roles, one at the creator
level and the other at another level (e.g. author and publisher)?
Would it be acceptable to use relationship designator for both roles in a
1XX, like this:
110 2_ Geological
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Why would one wish to do that? Nobody has suggested 264 1 $bGod for a
rock. All we need is 264 2 for the seller of the rock. Like
manuscripts, equipment and naturally occurring objects are not
published, and should have the appropriate 264 indicator for
M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't confuse RDA's production statement, which refers to man-made
stuff, with what might be similar statements in another universe for
naturally occurring objects.
Thinking this over, I should qualify that the production statement would
also apply
Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote:
I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, but just to sound off my agreement
with Mac's statement, No finite list can reflect the infinite relationship
possibilities and wondering yet again why there aren't more generic RDA
relators like contributor.
Lynne LaBare, Senior Librarian/Cataloger lyn...@provolibrary.com wrote:
Is it correct to state that I can use contributor (20.2.1.3) or
creator (I.2.1) when a *specific* MRI for an entity does not exist that
reflects the entity's relationship to the bibliographical content of the
work?
If
Jack Wu j...@franciscan.edu wrote:
I've always learned that a fictitious character is just that, a figment
of our imagination. It is not capable of authorship (or as creator) unless
it's a pseudonym of some real person. I can understand Holmes, Sherlock
getting an access point, but cannot
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
In hand: a book in French, cataloged using the English language. Except
for the summary, which is in French, and was likely lifted from another
source.
I see nothing under 7.10 Summarization of the Content to comment on the
advisability of
Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote:
When a note is quoting the source of information (see 1.10.3) and so
ends with a quotation mark, does the full stop fall inside or outside of
the quotation mark? I am having trouble finding an instruction that
addresses this.
Most folks have
Bernhard, S. Michael mbernh...@cabq.gov wrote:
It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes,
Sherlock |c (Fictitious character). Do
others agree? If I were still at a NACO library, I might go ahead and
correct both headings (unless I've missed
something somewhere with
Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote:
No one should be “correcting” authorized access points that were
correctly established under current policy, which is to include the
qualifier if there is a conflict but otherwise not.
But the material of 9.6.1.7 falls under the 9.19.1.2 group of
Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote:
In a message to the PCC list dated September 4, 2013, Kate James of the
LC Policy and Standards Division addressed this issue (with reference to
the record for “Holmes, Sherlock”):
Thanks for the reminder, Bob. Looking through my inbox, I held
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Even Bibframe does not have WEMI
True, but that's BIBFRAME, not RDAFRAME or FRBRFRAME. BIBFRAME, as I've
come to understand it, is trying to be all things to all people.
Supposedly something called application profiles will serve as templates
that lay
Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.com wrote:
However, there doesn't seem to be a relationship designator for
'producer'; or rather, there is one, but it is assigned to: producer: A
person, family, or corporate body responsible for most of the business
aspects of a production for screen,
Tarango, Adolfo atara...@ucsd.edu wrote:
Weighing in with trepidation to comment on the part of 2.8.1.3
addressing the appearance of publication data. Note, that 2.8.1.3 states a
condition must be met, that when *bo**th* publication data of the
reproducer and the original are found on the
If the OPAC supplies Publisher as the label for 264 1, then
certainly the printer of a one off copy of the electronic resource
should *not* be coded 264 1. Publisher name and date are important
clues to the authority and currency of a resource.
True enough.
Who printed it
when is not
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Thomas proposed:
Extent: 1 comic book (ix, 45 pages)
Dimensions: 24 cm
Colour Content: color
Perhaps it is because I grew up with cards, but I would find far
clearer the following without a label:
1 comic book (ix, 45 pages) : colour, 24 cm
or
Maliheh Dorkhosh m.dorkh...@gmail.com wrote:
For a musical work, Duets is as a preferred title?
Or
Duets is used after a Preferred title?
If the work has only a generic title like Duos or Duets, then Duets
is the preferred title (see RDA 6.14.2.6 and 6.14.2.4). Here's one example:
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote:
I have a question about the dagger symbol signifying death and RDA. From
the examples under the LC-PCC PS for 1.4 i.e., 1.7.5], it seems that in the
245 we should ignore the dagger and transcribe the title as if it is not
there, and provide 246s with
Gary Oliver oliv...@acu.edu wrote:
I have a book about a cemetery which was published by the author. There
is no date of any kind. There is a list of people with their years of
birth and death interred in this cemetery. The latest year of death in
this list is 2011.
Noted.
I emailed
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Mark, I notice you did not question my poorly written comment :-{)}.
Yeah, there are only so many hornets' nests I want to poke a stick into on
a Friday afternoon. :)
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
I don't understand how you arrived at this conclusion. Under 2.2.4, among
your choices are b) other published descriptions of the resource and d)
any other available source (e.g., a reference source). Nothing here says
to me that these sources must be in
Greta de Groat gdegr...@stanford.edu wrote:
Mark, you and i talked a little bit on the PCC list on June 13 about how
to tell the difference between a transmittal date and publication date,
with no practical conclusion that i could see. Did your GODORT contact
ever get any guidance? Looking
I'll quickly add that there's a watercolour under 3.7 (Applied Material)
that might pop up now and again for art works.
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Corey O'Halloran fid...@yahoo.com wrote:
I'm wondering if it's good practice to add initials for personal names in
378$q.
For example,
100 $aJohnson, John,$d1886-1962
378 $a [i.e., q] John S.
670 $aApples and oranges, 2012:$bcover (John S. Johnson)
In this case the initial for the
Sian Woolcock sian.woolc...@adelaide.edu.au wrote:
We are currently having a discussion about recording the number of
unnumbered plates in the extent field (MARC 300). The RDA toolkit has us
confused on this.
**
** **
Previously under AACR2 rules, if we had a book with unnumbered plates
Kevin M Randall k...@northwestern.edu wrote:
But then don't the words leaves and pages also constitute
Anglocentrism???
p. = pagina/paginae
ed. = editio
ill. = illustratio/illustrationes
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
SLC will give at least three from each category. Giving only the
first would be less access than AACR2 in some cases.
Read it again. If a single statement of responsibility names MORE THAN
THREE persons, families, or corporate bodies performing the same
For those interested, there was conversation on some of these points last
summer.
http://wikis.ala.org/ccda/index.php/6JSC/LC/21
Parts of the commentary on the wiki came from a thread or two on the
PCCLIST last summer. See the thread with subject line 6JSC/LC/21 at:
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:45 PM, M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a continuation of AACR2's rule of three, at least as far as the
number of names to post go.
Mea culpa. ...at least as far as the number of names that should appear
before invoking.
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
http
Stan Allen sal...@socialaw.com wrote:
Does RDA expect us to add more than author names to the 245, such as Esq.,
PH.D., Dr. and even the law firm lawyers are members of at the time the
book is written?
If the info is part of the statement of responsibility as found on the
piece, the default
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:44 PM, M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
N.B.: There's a disconnect between the sources--including outside the
resource--from which the producer's name may stem as found under 2.7.4.2
(and 2.2.4), and the instructions under 2.7.4.7, which jump right into
producer
DeSio, Sandra sde...@indiantrailslibrary.org wrote:
RDA 2.8.1.4 says to record dates of publication as they appear on the
source of information.
And further states that any words that are part of the date get transcribed
(that reference to 1.7). RDA gives 3 options for the number half of the
Stephen Early sea...@crl.edu wrote:
Maybe the listowners could set things up so that a footer with
subscription information appears in each email? This is what the OCLC-CAT
list does. As it is, finding the proper up-to-date commands to answer this
question involves web searching and
Jack Wu j...@franciscan.edu wrote:
Just a follow-up of questions on thesis for Country of Publication, etc.
(008/15-17):
In BibFormatStandards it says to use production information, but for
Theses to use code xx blank for original and reproduced theses. In AACR2 it
usually is 260 $c date,
Jack Wu j...@franciscan.edu wrote:
I interpret this to mean there would be no place in fixed country code
if in 264 1 Publication field there's no $a, no $b but only $c;
A publication statement would always include a $a and $b and $c, following
RDA's core instruction. Question is what you
Jack Wu j...@franciscan.edu wrote:
Thank you for the clarification. May I ask a follow up question. If a
thesis is produced but unpublished, we would have only a 264 0 and no 264
1. Would the 264 0 have $a Place $b [Producer not identified] $c Date, or
could the 264 0 have only $c but
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Field 502 is not in brief display.
There are no absolutes in cataloging. See attached. The same formatting
appears in the search results list.
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
attachment: BriefThesis.jpg
Northrup, Kristen D. knorth...@nd.gov wrote:
I just hit three consecutive RDA records that don’t include “(large
print)” in the 300. Usually RDA large print records include this, and
3.13.1.3 seems to imply that they should, but the fact that I hit several
in a row is making me wonder if
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
What is core for RDA, and what is core for patron needs, are two
*very* different things! AACR2 had a qualified GMD: text (large
print) which worked very well. This is but one example of AACR2's
superiority over RDA in terms of meeting patron needs, as
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
A hyphens replacing b. or d. is fine with me, as as a question
mark replace ca. (or approximately).
RDA's question mark is the same AACR2's. It's AACR2's ca. altering to
RDA's approximately that evokes consternation. Or do you see collapsing
the
Northrup, Kristen D. knorth...@nd.gov wrote:
One thing we're regularly coming across in our copy cataloging is someone
changing transcription to postal codes. For example, we get many records
from Thorndike Press. It says Waterville, Maine on the item. DLC does a
pre-pub with the
Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote:
I initially thought that RDA does not involve encoding. MARC encoding is
another thing and technique. But it is hard, at least so far, to completely
distinguish RDA, a resource description rule, from MARC encoding. We still
can see shades of MARC
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Yes, but all it affects in 264 2nd indicator. You provide 264 0
$aPlace, Jurisdiction :$bDegree Granting Institution,$cyear.
Does the Degree Granting Institution produce the thesis? Or the student?
...
My 502 for the thesis is: $b Th. D. $c
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
In 2.8.6.3 (Recording date of publication) there is an example May 2000.
This shows that not only the year, but also the month and presumably even
the exact date of publication is to be recorded in this element, if it is
given in the
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
In addition to the advantage of transcribing or supplying jurisdiction
in a form patrons can read, we do not know (do we?) that Bibframe will
have an equivalent to 008/15-17 Place of jurisdiction. Might having
that data in imprint be even more important
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:05 AM, M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see that portion of the 008 field listed here (
http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html), which is odd since I think it
would square pretty easily with the 260 $a/264 -1 $a given on that list.
I should add
Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.ca wrote:
But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright
… does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven’t seen
it done so far.
The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So
all you'll
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote:
1. Are we allowed to use, then, the more specific terms indented
underneath the relationship designator performer (which is in bold), or
are we to use performer only, to cover all those types of situations
represented by the more specific indented not
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote:
In the case of the $4 code, you’re saying you would use just the $4 code,
right? (And not a combination of $4 plus $e using the terminology
accompanying the code in the MARC Code List for Relators?). I don’t have a
problem with using just the $4 code, I
Myers, John F. mye...@union.edu wrote:
This issue was explored thoroughly in discussion paper and proposal
submitted to MARBI.
Links to said discussion paper and proposal (which have links of their own
pointing to a couple earlier documents).
Discussion paper:
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
John F, Myers posted:
EXAMPLE
[between 1846 and 1853?]
[between 1800 and 1899?]
[between 1970 and 1979?]
[between 1400 and 1600?]
These Anglo centrc phrases will not fly for non English languge materials
in non English
Don Charuk dcha...@torontopubliclibrary.ca wrote:
From my readings and the reading other's comments it has been said that
RDA no longer requires you to justify your additional access points. Is
this a valid interpretation of people's comments? If, so is there a
specific rule that states this
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
Actually, I had hoped for an easier way to switch between languages. Even
better would have been a possibility to directly compare e.g. the English
and the German version (perhaps by having both texts in two different
windows at the
Payne, Ophelia (omp2w) om...@virginia.edu wrote:
I know there was a long discussion last week about the 336, 337 and 338
fields for RDA and I was trying to see if my question was addressed. My
question is--- with the elimination of the GMD designator for
videorecordings, sound recordings,
Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote:
Heidrun, as to the why, I have no idea. Perhaps, it had to do with way
computers read letters only, and by putting a space between them, it could
read better.
It might even go further back than that, to card filing rules--at least for
the spacing in headings.
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote:
This may not be at all relevant here, but I have been noticing for at least
a year now that I have difficulty searching anything with an apostrophe in
LC's authority file. If I copy a heading which contains an apostrophe from
the body of a record in
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
RDA has WEMI; Bibframe has W/I.
My limited grasp of the BIBFRAME discussion suggests that it doesn't have
to be structured as WEMI. Since it's trying to be all things to all
people, it only has to accommodate it.
--
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex
Baumgarten, Richard, JCL baumgart...@jocolibrary.org wrote:
If we use the MARC relator code list, do we need to add a subfield 2 to
tell what thesaurus that we used?
I read the $4 as self-defined in that regard--source from only the MARC
relator codes list. For instance:
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
Well, let’s wait and see what Chris Oliver has come up with. I
gather the rest of the reworded chapters should appear soon in the Toolkit
(by the way, wasn't it announced that chapters 2 and 3 should be published
in February?).
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
But be that as it may: There is indeed an example for a grammatically
incomplete s-o-r in the ISBD (which was news to me), and this must give us
cause to think again (although of course we know that RDA deviates from the
ISBD
Arakawa, Steven steven.arak...@yale.edu wrote:
Curiously, in AACR2 2.5B7, the initial term in the extent examples is
ca. which is now approximately in RDA, but it's ca. not Ca. Was
AACR2 being inconsistent with ISBD in the examples?
Looks like it. And there are also leaves 81-149 and p.
Amanda Sprochi sproc...@health.missouri.edu wrote:
I'm working on a shorthand cheat sheet for RDA. My question: in the extent
element [300 field in MARC], it says to use the word approximately with an
estimation of units if the number cannot be easily ascertained. All of the
examples have
Alison Hitchens ahitc...@uwaterloo.ca wrote:
Thanks Mac, I may have missed it on the list if there was a discussion
that we could use element names as relators. I had RDA-L set to no mail
while I was away!
I've been going by the LC RDA training modules and they give the example
of
Fox, Chris c...@byui.edu wrote:
I'm fine with going with just the date, if there's agreement that it isn't
published
I was going to comment on this point up-thread, but was waylaid till now.
Is the choreographer creating DVDs of the performance for whomever asks for
it? If so, this sounds
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have been wondering how and why this situation concerning publication in
a year yet to come arose, and why LCPCCPS was written the way it is.
Perhaps the situation developed from an attempt in LCPCCPS to make RDA
easier to use while
Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote:
When a resource has parallel statements of responsibility on its chief
source of information, but only the connecting words are parallel, not
the names themselves, how does one treat this under RDA?
Monkeywrench.
An example from ISBD
Harden, Jean jean.har...@unt.edu wrote:
The mappings haven’t been updated yet. Once they are, 264 will appear where
appropriate.
And to follow on Jean's response, if you scroll to the very bottom of
the MARC-to-RDA and RDA-to-MARC pages, the latest update date is
given. These were last touched
Michael Borries michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu wrote:
A quick question. RDA 2.5.2.2 states that the sources of information
for an edition statement are:
** **
1. the same source as the title proper
** **
2. another source within the resource itself
** **
3. one of the
Aaron Smith aaronkaysm...@gmail.com wrote:
For OCLC users, the future optional addition will continue to be absolutely
necessary to avoid inadvertent record mergers via OCLC's Duplicate Detection
and Resolution algorithm; notes don't have adequate weight to avoid the
merger.
And I
Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.com wrote:
It is also very interesting that Mark indicates that there **was**, at
one point, an LC PS for 2.8.6.1 (Scope for Date of Publication) that
continued the practice of using a date of release to supply a publication
date, but that LC PS also did
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Pam said:
The Toolkit states Record the extent of the resource by giving the number
of units and an appropriate term for the type of carrier as listed under
3.3.1.3.
Therefore, wouldn't we use 1 videodisc rather than 1 DVD?
RDA also has the option of
Kevin M Randall k...@northwestern.edu wrote:
This touches on one of my favorite cataloging pet peeves, which is the
tendency of many catalogers to treat as other title information things
that really should be seen as essential parts of the title proper.
Another example came up on AUTOCAT a
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
I found this as a pagination statement:
[xvii], 219 pages
The source has no initial sequence with roman numerals. I have not found
instructions for use of brackets with supplied page numbering. Nor does
the bibliographic record refer
JOHN C ATTIG jx...@psu.edu wrote:
I proposed this issue as a project to CC:DA, and there is a Task Force
working to draft appropriate instructions for recording both contents notes
and accompanying materials statements (and perhaps other things); a
preliminary report of this Task Force (which
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
Granted that a Playaway can be judged as unmediated. But nevertheless,
something that arose earlier in this discussion caught my attention: the
suggested use of other with media type audio. Surely other is only
established as controlled
Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote:
If data can be transcribed as elements in categories, such as Author,
Name: Date: Affiliation: , and then authority records could be
automatically created. Is that right? Just my imagination :)
Could be. So far in MARC, the 38x fields
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:56 AM, M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
I for one welcome the strawman proposal instruction 27.1.1.3.2.3 on page
23. As RDA stands now, book-ish accompanying material isn't handled well.
I should clarify that last sentence: if following one of the ISBD options
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
Kevin Randall said I'm not understanding what the difficulty is. The
difficulty was a couple of missing links in RDA Toolkit. I was not
succeeding in getting to the right part of RDA (and in this case, LC PCC
PS), namely 3.1.4. The redirects
Arthur Liu art@gmail.com wrote:
I am unsure how to handle dates of publication for technical reports.
Generally, technical reports bear a date in the format Month Year (e.g.
December 2012) on the cover and/or technical report documentation page.
(Many reports do not have a title page.)
Pam Withrow withr...@perma-bound.com wrote:
Playaway Audio
336 - spoken word
337 - audio
338 - audio cartridge
In my opinion:
336 -- spoken word
337 -- audio
338 -- other
A Playaway Audio doesn't quite fit under the definition of an audio
cartridge (a cartridge containing audio tape).
--
Michael Chopey cho...@hawaii.edu wrote:
I don't know where the instruction for preceding the $e with a comma is to
be found, nor the instruction not to include the comma when the field
preceding the $e ends with a hyphen.
The closest I ever got: A comma is used ... to separate date, number,
Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote:
In my opinion a Playaway is unmediated. You don’t need anything other
than the object itself (and a source of electricity) to get the
information, in contrast to, say, a CD, which you need to put in a machine
in order to use.
Good point. I
Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.com wrote:
For preceding the $e with a comma, see the LC PCC PS for 1.7.1 Access
Points in Name Authority and Bibliographic Records (General)
http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1target=lcps1-223#lcps1-223
** **
1.
Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote:
Punctuations are included in RDA Toolkit Appendix D.1.2 and LC-PCC PS for
1.7.1http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp1target=rda1-787#rda1-787
GENERAL GUIDELINES ON TRANSCRIPTION
In the LC-PCC PS general guidelines, you can see
Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.com wrote:
Will they need to know about periods at the end of fields, and ISBD
punctuation? I doubt it.
I agree. However, I still mention this to folks since I can't judge
who does or who doesn't care about this sort of thing. On the double
punctuation
M. E. m.k.e.m...@gmail.com wrote:
19.3: Other Person, Family, and Corporate Body Associated with a Work
Designator: other (work)
Example: 700 1- Doe, John, $e other (work)
21.6: Other Person, Family, and Corporate Body Associated with a Manifestation
Designator: other (manifestation)
22.4
I don't see a reply to this post, so I'll give it a go.
Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote:
Is there a note order requirement in RDA?
Nope. At least, not in the main body of RDA.
I searched RDA Toolkit and found
Order of Elements in Appendix D.1 ISBD Presentation (LC PCC PS). There
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Todaka said:
We are working on an RDA record for a compilation of columns selected
from the Science Scope journal. We wanted to provide an access point
for Science Scope in 730 field.
The recently added $4prv Provider seems right to me. If the journal
Michael Borries michael.borr...@mail.cuny.edu wrote:
At this point is it considered necessary in fields 336-338 to use both
subfield $a with the term spelled out and also subfield $b with the code, or
is subfield $a with the term spelled out sufficient? I seem to see both
usages in various
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
I said:
We need a $e term and $4 code for contributor.
Could someone with the appropriate skills and connections propose the
addition of contributor to RDA relationship terms ...
It's already in RDA: see 20.2. It's just not explicitly listed in RDA
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote:
If we have a book that abridges another book, do we use MARC field 777
(other relationship) to code the relationship? And is the $i text
abridgement of (work) -- not capitalized as in RDA appendix J -- or can we
Michael Cohen mco...@library.wisc.edu wrote:
The example given is Roger Colbourne [and six others]
Some records in OCLC use the numerals rather than words, e.g. OCLC
#785874875 which has [and 5 others].
Is the use of words vs. numerals prescribed by RDA or PCC, or is this a
local decision
Yuji Tosaka tos...@tcnj.edu wrote:
Per RDA 3.4.5.9, let's say that we decided to record unnumbered sequences of
plates because they constitutes a substantial part of
the resource. RDA has the following example:
xii, 24 pages, 212 leaves of plates, 43 unnumbered leaves of plates
But let's
Henry Lam he...@silas.org.sg wrote:
2. ISBN + qualifier:
b. One of the objective of RDA is to make data become more data,
more usable to the machine. The qualifier is not part of the
identifier. Putting two data in one MARC subfield seems to me
contradicting to this objective. This
Henry Lam he...@silas.org.sg wrote:
Do we need a Preferred Title of Manifestation or Authorised Access
Point for Manifestation to connect the manifestation to other Group 1
entities?
I heard rumblings about doing such a thing a couple years ago. Don't
know if it got any further than the I
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
In RDA it is required to transcribe and trace only one.
To be accurate, RDA requires transcribing the *first* statement of
responsibility, not the first name therein.
... / written by X ; illustrated by Y ; edited by Z.
Written by X is the bare minimum
JOHN C ATTIG jx...@psu.edu wrote:
It is possible that a cataloger might decide that the names
of persons responsible for the work should be recorded in 245$c. Although
RDA does not say this explicitly, it does not explicitly contradict it
either.
The cataloger taking that route might be
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
The cataloger taking that route might be reading the wording of RDA
2.4.2.1 (the identification and/or function of any persons, families,
or corporate bodies responsible for the creation of, or contributing
to the realization of, the intellectual or artistic
Patton,Glenn patt...@oclc.org wrote:
Thanks to Joanna for citing this PCC recommendation. OCLC’s view on the
order of subfields is also very much influenced by this recommendation. We
believe that having $e in a consistent position and in the position that is
recommended will assist in the
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
