Heidrun said:
>... whether >the description of a serial should be based on the first
>or the latest issue (in cases of minor variations, which do not call
>for a new entry altogether).
The difficulty with latest issue, is that the latest issue today, this
week, this month, or this year is not the latest issue tomorrow, next
week, next month, or next year.
Our clients too want current publisher (as for integrating resources).
We have been breaking the AACR2 rule by changing serial 260$b to agree
with their present source of the serial. The repeating 264 with first
indicators for earlier, intervening, and current publisher, solves
that problem. We can return to a abiding by the rules.
We use 246 for minor title changes. Whether first is in 245 and
change in 246, or the reverse, makes little difference to searching.
Field 264 first and second indicators (also allowing imprint for
unpublished material) is one of the few improvements represented by
RDA. Too bad both indicators were not added to 260, with 260$e$f$g
removed. It would have greatly simplified integration of RDA records
with legacy records, and created no change for a majority of materials
which have only one publisher.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
