J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Steven Arakawa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
245 00 $a Revista de derecho internacional y del Mercosur/direito
internacional e do Mercosul ...
246 30 $a Revista de direito internacional e do Mercosul
I find this solution for a multilingual title very acceptable, and
much superior to the present AACR2 provision. But we DO need an
example, so we will all do the same thing.
It's better than the propsed rule in the draft, anyway.
But think: how is it going to be cited? Anything that puts a difference
between the ordinary cited form and the user can't be a good thing, and
can be tolerated only when there's a high value in another direction.
Here, the only value I see is in literal transcription, and I don't
understand what significant value is obtained.
A large letter appearing in more than one word differs from word(s)
given once in normal typography, and in my view may well be repeated
(since it *does* appear in multiple words). But again, we need an
example of that in the rules.
Yes.
Sometimes an example is better than an easy to misinterpret rule.
Agreed.
Hal Cain
Joint Theological Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.17/228 - Release Date: 12/01/2006
