[RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Hi, I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote « 61 » as year of production, under the image. Does it means I must record « 61 » in 264 $c, and then write up a note ? As much as I can tell, we're not allowed to use « 61 [i.e. 1961] » or « [19]61 ». What do you think ?

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal posted: I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote 61 ... 264 0 $a]Place, Jurisdiction] :$bArtist's Name,$c[19]61. This assumes the artist's name appears on the etching. If it is a reproduction as apposed to the original etching, the 264 2nd indicator would

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

-Coelho_Marie-Chantal?=@kepler.riq.qc.ca; L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal Cc : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Marie-Chantal posted: I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote 61 ... 264 0 $a]Place, Jurisdiction] :$bArtist's Name,$c[19]61

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Hi again! The problem is that we are send from 2.7.6 to 1.8, and then, from 1.8 to 1.7. So the same rules seem to apply to all « transcribed » elements (title, statement of responsibility, edition, production statement, etc ...). If characters are missing in a title, I must write up a note;

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

, August 08, 2013 10:54 To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Hi, I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote « 61 » as year of production, under the image. Does it means I must record « 61 » in 264 $c, and then write up a note

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

) ** ** *From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal *Sent:* Thursday, August 08, 2013 10:54 *To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA *Subject:* [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Joan Wang Envoyé : 8 août 2013 14:44 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form According to RDA

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 2:15 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Hi! Yes, I am dealing with the original intaglio. Marie-Chantal L'Ecuyer-Coelho Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

de Deborah Fritz Envoyé : 8 août 2013 14:56 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Since RDA does not address this situation specifically, you must apply the RDA principles to your decision. Under the principle of representation (put down what you

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal said: The problem is that we are send from 2.7.6 to 1.8, and then, from 1.8 to 1.7. So the same rules seem to apply to all « transcribed » elements (title, statement of responsibility, edition, production statement, etc ...). Unlike title, RDA does allow the providing in brackets

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal, I would give 1961, without using any square brackets. My reasoning goes as follows: You do not have to supply the date, because in fact you know the year. The only problem is that it is written on the source of information in some kind of shorthand. But when you think about

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Mac said: It does not matter to me, or patrons I suspect, whether one uses $c[19]61. $c[1961] or $c1961. It *is* important that the whole year be there, since one should not have to wait for a note to know whether it is 1761, 1861, or 1961. A little pragmatism is in order here! To