J. McRee Elrod <m...@slc.bc.ca> 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 option of using a more exact unit name. Why repeat a > term already in 338 in 300, when there is a more patron friendly one, > e,g, 338 object, and 300 Playaway?
Assuming both 338 and 300 $a are displayed. > Surely you would not use "object" > as unit name? No, since RDA tells you not to. See the exceptions list under 3.4.1.3, for instance. Not to mention 3.4.1.5 in its pre-April form. > We would say "rock" for example, if the object is a rock. > So would RDA. > While the too many RDA options will result in too great variety, we > should take advantage of options which will better serve our users. > Indeed. > > In the absence of GMD, an exact unit name is even more vital than > before. Most icons are generic, and media term display is still in > flux. Sometimes a media is is no help, e.g., "other". How would that > be as a unit name? > It wouldn't be. > > I add "if the most exact and popular" to your quoted Toolkit provision > above. How often to you hear people say "videodisc" for a DVD? > I did, the other day. But then again, I was drinking. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>
