My thanks to the folks who sent in feedback on how they would handle my two date examples. As I suspected, there was considerable variation on how the dates would be entered for these resources-here is a summary, with some paraphrasing, and extrapolating, so hopefully I have interpreted all the replies correctly:
Example 1 Verso of book reads: Copyright C 2013 First printing, August 2012 ISBN 9780321832740 Use C to supply PubD = 2 264_1 . $c[2013] Use C to supply PubD, add C = 1 264_1 . $c[2013] 264_4 $cC2013 ---- Use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add C = 4 264_1 . $c[2012] 264_4 $cC2013 Use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add PrtD, add C = 1 264_1 . $c[2012] 264_3 . $c2012. 264_4 $cC2013 Enter 1st Prt as PubD = 2 264_1 . $c2012. ------------------------------ Here is my take on the 1st example: LC-PCC PS for 2.10.6 <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp2&target=lcps2-1702#lcp s2-1702> B) says: "If an item lacking a publication date contains a copyright date and a date of manufacture and the years differ, supply a date of publication that corresponds to the copyright date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date" C.1) says: "Supply a date of publication that corresponds to the manufacture date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date. For books, this means that the item is assumed to be the first printing of the edition. Also record the manufacture date as part of a manufacture statement if determined useful by the cataloger." Email correspondence with LC clarified that since, for books, the first printing of the edition is assumed to be a likely publication date, if the item lacking a publication date contains a copyright date and a date of manufacture and the years differ, supply a date of publication that corresponds to the first printing date, in square brackets, since it is not reasonable to assume that the copyright date is a likely publication date, since it is logical to assume that the first printing date is the more likely publication date (the resource cannot be published until it is printed, once it is printed, it is likely to be immediately published, and publishers have been known to put later copyright dates on resources) I did ask LC to make this a bit more obvious in the LC PCC PS, but I'm not sure I convinced them that this would be necessary. So, based on this, I would use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add PrtD, add C *and* I would also add the note to explain why I used the printing date rather than the C date (to help copy catalogers, not patrons): 264_1 . $c[2012] 264_3 . $c2012. 264_4 $cC2013 500 $aFirst printing, 2013. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Example 2 Verso of book reads: Copyright C 2007 First printed in paperback 2008 ISBN 977-0-300-14333-1 (pbk) ISBN 978-0-300-12078-3 (alk. Paper) Share hardcover record, but otherwise use 1st Prt to supply PubD = 3 264_1 . $c[2008] Share hardcover record, but otherwise use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add C = 4 264_1 . $c[2008] 264_4 $cC2007 Share hardcover record, but otherwise use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add PrtD, add C = 1 264_1 . $c[2008] 264_3 . $c2008. 264_4 $cC2007 Share hardcover record, but otherwise use 1st Prt as PubD, do not add C because would be confusing = 1 264_1 . $c2008. -------------------- Here is my take on the 2nd example: First, I agree that we would, in the past, add the paperback to the hardcover record, if the only difference is the binding; but I have to say that the date difference always bothered me (especially if it actually said "Paperback published ." rather than "Paperback printing ." ). I know that we are currently in the 'don't rock the boat' mode while we are still in MARC, and so will probably continue with this practice, but I am even more uneasy with it, under RDA thinking. But, let's say there was some indication of a difference, e.g., a reader's guide added to the paperback. In that case, I would apply the same reasoning as before from LC-PCC PS for 2.10.6 <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp2&target=lcps2-1702#lcp s2-1702> and use 1st Prt to supply PubD, add C and, again, add an explanatory note about the date I used to supply the PubD. 264_1 . $c[2008] 264_3 . $c2008. 264_4 $cC2007 500 $aFirst printing, 2008. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- It is interesting that 3 responses said to use the C date to supply the PubD , for the 1st example, but no responses said to do that for the 2nd example; I assume that is because the C was the latest date in the 1st example. To me, this indicates that clarification at the LC-PCC PS for 2.10.6 <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp2&target=lcps2-1702#lcp s2-1702> would be very helpful. Thanks again to everyone for the responses. They certainly verified for me that this "First printing" issue is still not crystal clear. Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. <mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com> debo...@marcofquality.com <http://www.marcofquality.com> www.marcofquality.com From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 9:32 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] No date of publication, first printing Dear RDA-L Folks, I would very much like to get some broad feedback from as many of you as possible, on how you would handle the dates for following two resources: Example 1 Verso of book reads: Copyright C 2013 First printing, August 2012 ISBN 9780321832740 Which date would you use to supply the publication date: a) the copyright date b) the first printing date Would you add any other date information? --------------------- Example 2 Verso of book reads: Copyright C 2007 First printed in paperback 2008 ISBN 977-0-300-14333-1 (pbk) ISBN 978-0-300-12078-3 (alk. Paper) The hardcover version was published in 2007 Which date would you use to supply the publication date for the paperback that you have: c) the copyright date d) the first printing (paperback) date Would you add any other date information? --------------------- I'm trying to get a sense of how much variation we can expect to see in copy cataloging records, for this type of situation. If you would rather not share with the list, then would you please reply to me personally at: debo...@marcofquality.com? Thanks very much, Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. debo...@marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com
