Does anyone know who to contact about a typo in the RDA Toolkit?
The following example under 126.96.36.199:
ةليلو ةليل فل أ
ةليلو ةليل فلأ بات
English language form recorded as preferred title: Arabian nights
The Arabic is backwards; it should be: اللف ليلة ولىلة etc.
Here's a postscript to the discussion (for those of you who still care):
I just checked the definition of other title information in the ISBD
consolidated and found that it is similar, but not identical to the one
given in RDA.
ISBD consolidated (2011), chapter 1.3:
Other title information
I know that under RDA we no longer use brackets to indicate a range of
unnumbered pages or leaves in the physical description. What about in notes?
RDA 1.10.4 says, Refer to passages in the resource, or in other sources, if
these either support assertions made in the description
RDA does not address this, but there is an LC-PCC Policy statement that
catalogers may follow if they like and should if they're creating PCC records:
LC-PCC PS for
You were following my mistake, which I don't (or at least I hope I don't)
normally make in catalog records.
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
So, according to ISBD there is no problem with other title
information which is not found on the t.p. - it is still recorded as
other title information.
This is another point (albeit a small one) where RDA digresses from ISBD.
Where authorities differ, e.g., AACR2 vs. LCRI
At the risk of sounding even more obsessive-compulsive than Bob, I offer you
Not everything that we thought of as 'Notes' under AACR, is a 'Note' in RDA.
The example you show, comes under the category of 'Content'.
Content can either be at the Work level-applying to *every*
The English language is really going down hill when record and transcribe
can mean different things (to us as catalogers and code writers) and
general populace whom we want to use our library do not go around making
these *very fine *distinctions.
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Deborah Fritz
Thank you Deborah for the extended explanation, particularly regarding the
distinction between record and transcribe. I'm still finding it a
challenge to find what I'm looking for in the Toolkit.
Gene, I kind of agree with what you're saying, but I guess I'd just point out
that library users
Agreed, Bob, on nearly all accounts.
I would definitely like to see the plot summary at the Work level, rather
than being repeated over and over for each expression, but well just have
to wait and see whether that is eventually allowed under the model.
As for the Contents Note, although
For a research library the pagination of the bibliography can be very
important, as the the graduate student creates a bibliography for his/her
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.eduwrote:
You’re right, Deborah, RDA considers this is an attribute of
You use the feedback mechanism in Toolkit to report these.
Adam L. Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 685-8782 fax
Mail list logo