One of the things that I think will be the most difficult for catalogers to get used to under RDA is going to be the fact that the t.p. is no longer, not really, the reliable source of information it is under AACR2.
I just came across an RDA record with no S-o-R on the t.p. But there was a 245 $c in the record. No brackets indicating the information was supplied, and no note telling me where it was supplied from, either. It looks to me from 2.4.2. that this is perfectly appropriate according to RDA: 2.4.2.2 Sources of information. Take statements of responsibility relating to title proper from the following sources (in order of preference): a) same source as the title proper; b) another source within the resource itself; c) one of the other sources of information specified under 2.2.4... I don't see any instructions to mark or note the s-o-r if it comes from a source other than the t.p. Am I (he asked, hopefully) missing something? I had always thought that the main reason for putting an s-o-r in a record was to facilitate the quick and easy identification of the book by comparing the t.p. to the 245. Which is why, under AACR2, any title area information in the record but not on the t.p. must be bracketed as supplied. After all, most users I would guess look at access points to determine authorship. In this case, it was only by inspecting the book rather carefully that I was able to figure out where it was taken from, and that I was indeed looking at the correct record for the piece. Anyone have any insights into why RDA does this? Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137
