RDA-L readers, Mac Elrod said: "SLC agrees with the various guidelines (LC, PCC) that one should use the single year in 008 and 26X as on the item. We consider the book to be published when the publisher said it was, and the item received before January to be an early release, common for review copies. We should describe items as they present themselves. Remember the flap when some libraries who had advance copies of a Harry Potter, allowed people to see them in advance?"
When no publication date appears on a book, then the item has not "presented itself" as having one, to use Mac's phrase. The copyright date is not the publication date. I have yet to see a book with a statement "First published in ..." or the unadorned year on the title page with any year later than the current one, regardless of the fact that copyright years often are later. It appears that confusion has arisen between the roles of distribution and publication. Data about the actual date of publication, with month and day as well as year, are made available to all concerned. I believe that Publisher's Weekly is the tool used in the trade (correction requested). The book does not legally get sold in bookstores or lent in libraries prior to the publication date. But it can be distributed at an earlier date. Indeed, distribution must occur for bookstores to have thebook available on publication date. The case of Harry Potter involved distribution, not publication. The books were distributed to libraries, who were allowed to have the book in advance of publication, fully processed and ready to lend, but were prohibited from releasing the book until the stroke of midnight on the date of publication. The Harry Potter case is not the only one: I have had other materials arrive at my desk with notice not to release them until a specific date. In talking about an "early release" there's also a danger of confusion with releases labeled "Advance uncorrected proof", etc., which are NOT the same as the published book. There's no need for the phrase "early release." Rather, an understanding of the relationship between distribution and publication covers the Harry Potter scenario and similar ones. But if you have received the book with no restriction on the date on which it may be released for use, it has most probably been published and is ready for public use. 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 supply a missing publication date, something not required in AACR2 nor LCRI, as in the following. Here are instructions from AACR2: 1.4F6: "If the dates of publication, distribution, etc., are unknown, give the copyright date or, in its absence, the date of manufacture (indicated as such) in its place." LCRI 1.4F6 says "If the item contains only a copyright date, give the copyright date." The corresponding instruction in RDA 2.8.6.6: "If the date of publication is not identified in the single-part resource, supply the date or approximate date of publication. " LCPCCPS 2.8.6.6 has "If the copyright date is for the year following the year in which the publication is received, supply a date of publication that corresponds to the copyright date." Unlike RDA, AACR2 does not instruct to supply a publication date. Perhaps because RDA has that instruction, and because of the association of the copyright date with the publication date in a manner fostered by AACR2, the LCPCCPS was written the way it is. Maybe someone can clarify further. I wonder who is required to follow LCPCCPS. To my knowledge OCLC does not require that, unlike the expectation to follow both AACR2 and LCRI in days gone by. LCPCCPS clearly states what to do, for those who require instruction that does not require cataloger's judgment. Perhaps this LCPCCPS was formulated as a time-saving device, intending to parallel AACR2/LCRI. However, it does not parallel them exactly. Sincerely - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
