I've been told that, for now, information in the 34X fields can and should continue to be duplicated in the 007 and the 538 (NTSC or PAL, etc.), until such time as ILSs catch up. So in the limited RDA A/V cataloging I have done, everything that I'm putting in 34X is also somewhere else in the MARC record. I know it's duplication of effort, but we've been doing that for years with fixed field coding and info in the variable fields, and rather than making an exception to RDA (the more exceptions made, the more they need to be remembered and documented), I just do what it says. Hopefully it works out, because I'm not smart enough to figure it out myself. Chris
-----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 1:04 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Using 344-347? Bernadette O'Reilly asked: >- whether other agencies expect to use 34X straight away or will >continue to use 300 $b at least until LC-PCC and specialist bodies >produce best practice guidelines SLC will continue to use 300 :$b, and will not code 34X, in part for consistency with legacy records (it would be difficult to program this change retrospectively), but mainly so that this helpful information will be in brief display without requiring clients to remap their OPACs. We don't know what will happen with Bibframe, particularly to the equivalent information to 34X in fixed fields. We may have to revisit the matter then. __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca) {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
