Marie-Chantal said:
>The problem is that we are send from 2.7.6 to 1.8, and then, from 1.8
>to 1.7. So the same rules seem to apply to all « transcribed »
>elements (title, statement of responsibility, edition, production
>statement, etc ...).
Unlike title, RDA does allow the providing in brackets of a missing
element in imprint or production statements, whether place,
jurisdiction, name, or date. I guess that is what "record" means as
opposed to "transcribe". So why not a portion of an element, as in
264 1 $aVancouver [Washington]? If you would feel better, bracket
the whole year, as you would if supplying imprint year from copyright
statement.
There are cases when the entire title is supplied in brackets, so I
think RDA's not allowing a portion is silly. I assume the provision
is to facilitate use of harvested data? I wonder if we should have
some civil disobediance about that.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
