Jack: There is no direct correspondence between MARC tag numbers/sequencing and the order of ISBD elements. For instance, here are selected fields between 250 and 500, and the ISBD areas the data fall into:
250 Area 2 300 Area 5 310 Area 7 321 Area 7 336 Area 0 337 Area 0 338 ? 342 Area 3 362 Area 3 (if 1st indicator is 0), Area 7 (if 1st indicator is 1) 490 Area 6 500 Area 7 Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu> (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jack Wu Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 8:24 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] cm period/no period and sample records Not trying to harp on a ., but I do have some questions which hopefully Kevin or someone else can help resolve: When "LC-PCC PS says that we should give no period at the end of 300 if there is no 490, or to give a period if there *is* a 490" Would this have anything to do with the fact that 490 immediately follows 300, and if so, doesn't the introduction of 33x ,34x fields break that chain of influence? And if the policy is also "making the following assumptions... 2) The record is going to be using the old ISBD standard, that did not call for a point at the end of a paragraph" Would the New ISBD standard, which I assume we are or will be following, then call for a point at the end of any paragraph break, including end of the 300 field? Thanks, Jack Jack Wu Franciscan University of Steubenville j...@franciscan.edu<mailto:j...@franciscan.edu> >>> Kevin M Randall <k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu>> >>> 4/24/2013 3:47 PM >>> :) I guess I should say that the underlying . of my message was that whether or not you put a . after "cm", it's pretty much .-less, because hardly anybody is generating an IBSD display anyway—and if they are, it's most likely not coming out "correct"... Kevin From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jack Wu Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 2:02 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] cm period/no period and sample records If I'm not mistaken, this's the fullest explanation yet on the weighty matter of . / no . which have perplexed so many catalogers so much for so long. Were it not for this unsettled . , I can almost say I'm ready to create a reasonably error free RDA. But alas, use or nonuse of the . at end of the 300 field stops me in my tracks. It has certainly been instructive, fun, and frustrating to be dancing about the . without ever come to the . , or resolve it. There is a . at the end of cm. ever since invention of centimeter, meter and their abbreviations, well before any rules of cataloging. The end of field . and end of abbreviation . coexisted in blissful ambiguity in the bibliographic world without controversy or disadvantage for how long? I'm only afraid we may just have missed the point when the controversy of . or no . is nowhere at an end and we'll soon be at a . of no return. I just think it easier and worthwhile for RDA to continue the . and resolve our singular . , .., no . confusion if for no other reason than to please the vast crowd of non-catalogers that we serve. Jack Jack Wu Franciscan University of Steubenville j...@franciscan.edu<mailto:j...@franciscan.edu> Jack >>> Kevin M Randall <k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu>> >>> 4/24/2013 11:15 AM >>> [from a message I sent to Autocat a couple of weeks ago] The instruction on when or when not to use a period at the end of field 300 is based on an out-of-date version of the ISBD. The punctuation conventions have changed SIGNIFICANTLY: - Every area is preceded by a point, space, dash, space, UNLESS an area starts a new paragraph, IN WHICH CASE a point is given at the end of the preceding area. - When an element ends with a point (i.e., the point is part of the data, such as the abbreviation "ed.") the entire ISBD punctuation is still given; that is, it's still point, space, dash, space, not just space, dash space. Example: ". -- 3rd ed.. --" and not ". -- 3rd ed. --" So, when the LC-PCC PS says that we should give no period at the end of 300 if there is no 490, or to give a period if there *is* a 490, it is making the following assumptions: 1) The record is going to be displayed in an ISBD format that starts a new paragraph with Area 7. 2) The record is going to be using the old ISBD standard, that did not call for a point at the end of a paragraph. 3) The display program knows how to supply the space, dash, space, but doesn't know how to supply the point. If we're going to follow the *current* ISBD, then we need to know whether the display program is going to supply all, some, or none of the prescribed ISBD punctuation. If it's going to supply all, then we should only give punctuation that is part of the data (e.g., a period that is part of an abbreviation, not part of ISBD prescribed punctuation). If it's going to supply some (the space, dash, space), then we should ALWAYS end every field ISBD-displayable field with a period, or TWO periods if the last element happens to be an abbreviation (except for the last field going into the ISBD display--and good luck figuring out which one, since it's probably somewhere in the 0XX block). If it's going to supply none, then in addition to the period, we also need to put the space, dash, space at the end of every field (with the exception of the final field, or every field that ends a paragraph--and again, good luck getting those right). [end of quoted text from Autocat message] In sum, the relationship between ISBD and MARC has always been a bit wonky. I don't think there is any way that we can code data in MARC records so a "perfect" ISBD display can be generated, at least with today's OPACs. Just one more reason I hope an RDA-element-friendly metadata structure comes our way sooner rather than later... Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu> (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Hinchcliff, Marilou Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 9:06 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> Subject: [RDA-L] cm period/no period and sample records Per RDA Abbreviations, metric dimensions (e.g., cm) are not considered abbreviations and so should not end with a period. If there is a 490 series statement, however, cm IS followed by a period based on the ISBD requirement that a series statement be PRECEDED by space full stop space (D1.2.7). ISBD also requires that each NOTE be preceded by space full stop space dash space or start a new paragraph for each. Does this mean that if you start a new paragraphs, as for the 1st note, you don’t need to precede it by a space full stop, let alone the space full stop dash space? The sample records in RDA Toolkit (Tools/Examples of RDA records) show a period after every instance of “cm” except for the example on p. 15-16. Of the examples with cm., most do NOT have series statements but DO have at least one note. The one example on p. 16 with cm has no series but does have a note. Is this one example an error? Or are all the examples with cm. and no series the erroneous ones? Marilou Z. Hinchcliff, Coordinator of Cataloging and Interim Coordinator of Collection Development Harvey A. Andruss Library Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania 400 E. 2nd St. Bloomsburg PA 17815 570-389-4226 mhinc...@bloomu.edu<mailto:mhinc...@bloomu.edu> ________________________________ Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance ________________________________ Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance
