Re: [RDA-L] Fw: What Goes into the 1xx Field?

J. McRee Elrod wrote: > Karen Coyle said: > >>It doesn't matter if these are coded as multiple 1xx's or multiple 7xx's >>-- they are equal as authors ... > > How does one create an added entry, subject, entry, footnote, or > listing in a single entry bibliography for the work? Not to mention > as

Re: [RDA-L] Order of 040 subfields

Patton,Glenn 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 quick identifi

Re: [RDA-L] 502 Thesis/Dissertation Note in RDA

Byrd, Jacqueline Jo wrote: > LCPS 7.9.1.3 tells us to use the "appropriate subfield of MARC" in the 502 > note for theses and dissertations and not to use the AACR2-style punctuation. > > RDA Example for LCPS: > 502 ## $b Ph. D. $c University of Toronto $d 1974 > > The LC

Re: [RDA-L] Order of 040 subfields

Gary L Strawn wrote: > Just for fun, I located a typical-enough record that will be changed, and > then re-coded as RDA during phase 2. Here's the outcome: ... > 010: : |a n 85010460 > 040: : |a InU |b eng |e rda |c DLC |d DLC > 046: : |s 16 > 100:1 : |a Smith, Robert, |d 17th century

Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions

Karen Coyle wrote: > But now I have to ask an ignorant (but perhaps not stupid) question: are the > libraries that catalog "directly" in ISBD? I've seen cataloging rules that > incorporate ISBD concepts, but I haven't ever encountered a library where > ISBD is their cataloging rules. I'm wondering

Re: [RDA-L] Subfields 6 and 8 in 33X fields

Peary, Carole wrote: > Could someone explain to me how the linking subfields are used in the 33x > fields? Either on-list or off-list would be fine. Thank you for the help. The $6 appears when dealing with multiple scripts for the same element term, quite like when 100s and 245s pop up in two di

Re: [RDA-L] RDA for video recordings

JOHN C ATTIG 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 reading the wo

Re: [RDA-L] RDA for video recordings

J. McRee Elrod 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 content

Re: [RDA-L] Preferred title of manifestation(Was: Re:"Date of publication not identified" & DtSt, Dates)

Henry Lam 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 wonder if" sta

Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] "Main entry" in RDA

J. McRee Elrod 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 (RDA's "core") f

Re: [RDA-L] [and X others]

Michael Cohen 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 based on prefe

Re: [RDA-L] Displaying 33X (was: Plurals in content types)

J. McRee Elrod wrote: > Joan Wang said: > >>The th[r]ee 33x fields are supposed to replace GMD. So I think that they can >>be displayed in an OPAC as a particular type of material ... > > Yes for content and carrier. These two [338 : 336] should display > above other data (ISBD Area 0) or at the

Re: [RDA-L] Recording unnumbered pages/leaves of plates

Yuji Tosaka 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 assume that

Re: [RDA-L] Hardback & paperback, and their ISBN

Henry Lam 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 issue has been qu

Re: [RDA-L] Quick question re: abridgements in RDA

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse 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 > capitalize it

Re: [RDA-L] Use of brackets (was: Sources of information ...)

J. McRee Elrod wrote: > What I find strange is the resistance to supplying bracketed > jurisdictions in 260$a, when the city can be supplied in brackets if > not on the item. It's an option now. To steal an example from RDA: Dublin [Ohio] -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex

[RDA-L] Relationship designators for x11 access points

A quick reminder in case anybody wants to emphasize this point on their cataloging cheat-sheets. I've run into a handful of RDA bib records in OCLC today where the 111 or 711 includes relationship designator(s) in the $e. These should appear in the $j, as the $e is defined for "subordinate unit."

Re: [RDA-L] Why brackets in LC-PCC PSes for 2.8.2.6 and 2.8.6.6?

Michael Chopey wrote: > Am I missing that instruction somewhere? I wouldn't think of these > statements as "supplied information taken from a source outside the resource > itself" as in 2.4.4. I think the problem stems from the makers of RDA never getting around to grabbing the last sentence of

Re: [RDA-L] note order in RDA

I don't see a reply to this post, so I'll give it a go. Joan Wang 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 is an > element listing

Re: [RDA-L] relationship designator between two aggregate works

J. McRee Elrod 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 > also pu

Re: [RDA-L] Use of subfield $b in 336, 337, 338

Michael Borries 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 records and instructions. I

Re: [RDA-L] Relators for contributors and consultants (fwd)

J. McRee Elrod 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 Appendix I.

Re: [RDA-L] Use of ISBD punctuation with RDA. And a workshop.

Ian Fairclough 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 point in particular, I add

Re: [RDA-L] Relators for contributors and consultants (fwd)

M. E. 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 (manifestatio

Re: [RDA-L] Use of ISBD punctuation with RDA. And a workshop.

Joan Wang wrote: > Punctuations are included in RDA Toolkit Appendix D.1.2 and LC-PCC PS for > 1.7.1 > GENERAL GUIDELINES ON TRANSCRIPTION > > In the LC-PCC PS general guidelines, you can see "Punctuation at the End >

Re: [RDA-L] Use of ISBD punctuation with RDA. And a workshop.

Deborah Fritz wrote: > I *think* that you can get to the LC PCC PS in the Toolkit, without a > subscription to it. Correct, it's open and free on the web. Ditto the MARC-RDA mapping documents under the Tools tab (a more recent and welcomed change). -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] Use of ISBD punctuation with RDA. And a workshop.

Fox, Chris 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

Re: [RDA-L] Typos in Titles

Ian Fairclough wrote: > RDA does not give instruction on using [sic] (in contrast to AACR2 1.0F1) It allows it (obliquely). Quoting from RDA 1.7.1: When the instructions in chapters 2–4 specify transcription of an element as it appears on the source of information, apply the general guidelines

Re: [RDA-L] eBooks & Playaways

Pam Withrow 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"). -- Mark K. Ehlert Mi

Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation

Michael Chopey 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, place, or des

Re: [RDA-L] eBooks & Playaways

Robert Maxwell 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 had my media type

Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation

Deborah Fritz 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=lcpschp1&target=lcps1-223#lcps1-223 > > > ** ** > > 1. Punctuation/spacing within

Re: [RDA-L] Numbered and Unnumbered Sequences

Ian Fairclough 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 elsewhere to unnumbered p

Re: [RDA-L] RDA instructions for accompanying material?

JOHN C ATTIG 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 includes

Re: [RDA-L] eBooks & Playaways

Ian Fairclough 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 vocabulary for use whe

Re: [RDA-L] S-o-R/RDA 2.4.1.4

Joan Wang 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 populate both bib and authorit

Re: [RDA-L] RDA instructions for accompanying material?

On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:56 AM, M. E. 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 option

Re: [RDA-L] RDA instructions for accompanying material?

Ian Fairclough 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 from AACR2 1.5E and f

Re: [RDA-L] Technical report dates and publication

Arthur Liu 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.) On the repor

Re: [RDA-L] Technical report dates and publication

Deborah Fritz 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 not survive as an LC PCC

Re: [RDA-L] Exact unit names

J. McRee Elrod 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 opti

Re: [RDA-L] RDA and the Title Proper

Kevin M Randall 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 few years ago.

Re: [RDA-L] Question about edition statements

Michael Borries 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 other sources of

Re: [RDA-L] Question about edition statements

Aaron Smith 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 believe it was OCLC th

Re: [RDA-L] Query re. 264 in RDA Toolkit

Harden, Jean 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 in mid-2010 and -

Re: [RDA-L] Publication date/copyright date

Ian Fairclough 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 fulfilling the instruction to su

Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility

Benjamin A Abrahamse 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 1.4.5.10.2: 8 cap

Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility

Heidrun Wiesenmüller 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?). > They were indeed schedu

Re: [RDA-L] 2.4.3.3 Parallel statements of responsibility

Heidrun Wiesenmüller 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 sometimes). > There is also this

Re: [RDA-L] Capitalization of approximately in 300

Arakawa, Steven 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. 713-797" und

Re: [RDA-L] Capitalization of approximately in 300

Amanda Sprochi 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 approximately in lower case:

Re: [RDA-L] relationship designator and "in cooperation with"

Alison Hitchens 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 publisher: "Publisher" i

Re: [RDA-L] recording production statements

Fox, Chris 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 like a print-

Re: [RDA-L] Relationships and comic books/graphic novels

Baumgarten, Richard, JCL 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:

Re: [RDA-L] New format reproductions and RDA

J. McRee Elrod 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

Re: [RDA-L] Spelling of Qur'an

Dana Van Meter 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 LC's online cata

Re: [RDA-L] Initials in names of persons

Gene Fieg 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. -- Mar

Re: [RDA-L] German and French texts of RDA

Heidrun Wiesenmüller 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 same time). As the translati

Re: [RDA-L] GMD Designator Searching with RDA

Payne, Ophelia (omp2w) 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, etc., how would

Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Use of Headings for Fictitious Characters

J. McRee Elrod wrote: > 100 __|a Stilton, Thea (Fictitious character) > > If the resource says "by Thea Stilton", this is fine with me. Ditto > Geronimo Stilton. we should describe resources as they present > themselves. (I would not object to a subfield code for the > qualifier.) The qualif

Re: [RDA-L] Justification of Acces Points

Don Charuk 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 or is it implied? Thank you.

Re: [RDA-L] No date of publication, first printing

Jack Wu wrote: > You did say broad feedback, right? For 1st example I would use 2012 > At the risk of "me too-ing"... Ditto Jack's response. I'd also add the copyright date since it's different from the publication date. > , for 2nd example I would use 2008 if a record just for the paperbac

Re: [RDA-L] 264 dates

J. McRee Elrod 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 lan

Re: [RDA-L] 260 and 264 Fields

Myers, John F. 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:

Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query

Karen Nelson 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 get is: - 264 -

Re: [RDA-L] Can "Lecturer" be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?

Dana Van Meter 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 in bold term

Re: [RDA-L] Can "Lecturer" be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?

Dana Van Meter 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 just wanted

Re: [RDA-L] Jurisdiction in imprint

J. McRee Elrod 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 with Bibfram

Re: [RDA-L] Jurisdiction in imprint

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:05 AM, M. E. 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

Re: [RDA-L] "Translated from" notes and code for original language

Joan Wang 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 encoding in RDA rules. Fo

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

J. McRee Elrod 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 Theological Semi

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

Joan Wang wrote: > Do we still consider theses as manuscripts under RDA? If look at the > definition in RDA Toolkit, they are not. > "...typescript copy of a creator's work" might qualify. A stretch though. > But if look at OCLC special cataloging guidelines, they are. > "Bib Formats & Stan

Re: [RDA-L] Publication date including month or exact date: examples?

Heidrun Wiesenmüller 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 source of information. >

Re: [RDA-L] "approximately" in access points

J. McRee Elrod 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 separate "

Re: [RDA-L] Abbreviating place of publication (was 264 question)

Northrup, Kristen D. 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 transcription and that's

Re: [RDA-L] Recording (large print) in the 300

Northrup, Kristen D. 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 there has been a

Re: [RDA-L] Recording (large print)

J. McRee Elrod 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 opposed to

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

Jack Wu wrote: > Just a follow-up of questions on thesis for Country of Publication, etc. > (008/15-17): > In BibFormat&Standards 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, fixed code xxbl

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

Jack Wu 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 use to fill in tho

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

Jack Wu 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 missing $b since only

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

J. McRee Elrod 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 <>

Re: [RDA-L] Photocopy of a thesis in RDA?

On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:44 PM, M. E. 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 > "

Re: [RDA-L] Publication Date

DeSio, Sandra 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 date (reference to 1.8, det

Re: [RDA-L] BL Guide to RDA Name Authority Records - July 2013 changes

Gene Fieg wrote: > What is the *BL *in the guide? > British Library. > And will this be in the toolkit > Not only "will," but "is." Read the first paragraph of the announcement again. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] Unsubscribe help

Stephen Early 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 searching the list

Re: [RDA-L] Author affiliations

Stan Allen 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 RDA rule is to w

Re: [RDA-L] Change to option in 2.4.1.5 (Statement of responsibility naming more than one person, etc.)

J. McRee Elrod 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 function (o

Re: [RDA-L] Leaf (new RDA glossary term and definition)

For those interested, there was conversation on some of these points last summer. 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:

Re: [RDA-L] Change to option in 2.4.1.5 (Statement of responsibility naming more than one person, etc.)

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:45 PM, M. E. 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."

Re: [RDA-L] Leaf (new RDA glossary term and definition)

Kevin M Randall 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

Re: [RDA-L] Publication Date

Greta de Groat 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 at RDA 2.8.6.3, th

Re: [RDA-L] honouree vs. honoree

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

Re: [RDA-L] initials in 378 $q

Corey O'Halloran 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 author wa

Re: [RDA-L] recording on unnumbered plates

Sian Woolcock 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 we > would transcrib

Re: [RDA-L] Date of publication

Gary Oliver 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 the author

Re: [RDA-L] Date of publication

J. McRee Elrod 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

Re: [RDA-L] Date of publication

J. McRee Elrod 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 pr

Re: [RDA-L] Dagger symbol

Dana Van Meter 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 died (or gestor

Re: [RDA-L] Duets

Maliheh Dorkhosh 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: Danzi, Franz

Re: [RDA-L] "All illustrations"

J. McRee Elrod 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 > >

  1   2   >