Back when I was tangentially involved with academia (domestic partners with a professor), the academics considered theses and dissetations to be published and counted them as publications on one's curriculum vitae. O ften the dissertation was the academic's first official academic p ublication on the vitae . That is, the people who produce and use these documents consider them published.
Why AACR2 or RDA would not consider them to be "published" never made any sense. And now, because the carrier is different (electronic publication as opposed to the 6 copies of the Word document turned in to the Committee), but the content is the same, the publication status is different. That makes even less sense. Dawn Grattino Senior Cataloger Catalog Department Cleveland Public Library 17133 Lakeshore Blvd. Cleveland, OH 44110-4006 (phone) 216.623.2885 (fax) 216.623.6980 e-mail: dawn.gratt...@cpl.org http://www.cpl.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julie Moore" <julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 4:10:17 PM Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Perhaps it is time that we re-think the whole issue of theses. I think this is a long over-due discussion that we now have a chance to iron out. It has always bothered me that if they are in print only, then we treat them purely as manuscripts (stemming from the good ol' days when we actually typed -- on a typewriter -- our theses and dissertations.) Later on, the paper thesis would be continued to be cataloged as a manuscript ... but when it was digitized and put on the Internet, the same work would then be considered to be "published" ... so we cataloged them that way. Yet, it's the same exact thing. That has always bothered me. Having seen many other "published" materials on the Internet, it is my opinion that theses are just as "published" as other stuff on the Internet. I would prefer that we consider treating theses and dissertations "published" whether in paper or electronic. I would much rather prefer to see a fulfilled out 264 for the publication information. Until now, we were supposed to say that -- because they were not published -- there was no place of publication or publisher. However, there is obviously a place where the university resides, and there is a university which is responsible for passing the thesis or dissertation. Now that we have more granularity with the 264 and its many indicators, could we possibly use one of those indicators to show that this is a thesis or dissertation? Or maybe we need yet another indicator to show that. I would prefer to see theses and dissertations to be treated the same -- whether they are paper or electronic. It has always seemed rather ludicrous to me that if it is digitized and thrown up on the Internet, then it is "published." My preference is for them to be considered "published" whether they are paper or electronic. Best wishes, Julie Moore On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Adam Schiff < asch...@u.washington.edu > wrote: The implication of the instruction that all online resources are published is that when making a record for the electronic thesis from the record for the print manuscript, you'd need to change the type code to textual material and supply a place of publication and publisher. Adam -----Original Message----- From: Greta de Groat Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:55 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Why would this be an exception to the P-N practice? I don't see it addressed there as an exception. It seems to me that we have here two BIBCO instructions that are in conflict (if you're not doing PCC cataloging, then its not an issue). Greta de Groat Stanford University Libraries ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paradis Daniel" < daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 8:15:10 AM Subject: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD With the latest update to the RDA Toolkit, instruction 2.8.1.1 now includes the sentence: Consider all online resources to be published. Daniel Paradis Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514 873-1101 , poste 3721 Télécopieur : 514 873-7296 daniel.para...@banq.qc.ca < mailto: daniel.para...@banq.qc. ca > http://www.banq.qc.ca < http:// www.banq.qc.ca/ > _____ De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access de la part de J. McRee Elrod Date: ven. 2013-05-17 23:12 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Greta asked: <blockquote> So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that mean that they would still be catalo= ged as unpublished? If it is electronic, it is considered published. J. McRee (Mac) Elrod 4493 Lindholm Road Victoria BC V9C 3Y1 Canada (250) 474-3361 m...@elrod.ca </blockquote> -- Julie Renee Moore Head of Cataloging California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 “Those who bring sunshine to the lives of others cannot keep it from themselves.” ... James Matthew Barrie
