Isn't that perhaps a case of RDA 2.5.6 "Designation of a Named Revision
of an Edition", i.e. could it be the updated edition of the first edition?
If so, then I think the solution would be "First edition, updated
edition", because 2.5.6 comes after 2.5.2 according to D.1.1.
As far as I know, 2.5.6 isn't capitalized. The example "Roads revised"
in 2.5.6.3 seems to be a mistake.
Heidrun
On 18.10.2013 16:48, Guy Vernon Frost wrote:
You can string them along separating one from the other by a comma
250;__; $a Updated edition, First edition.
Sometime after the 2nd qtr OCLC update in 2104 you'll be able to
repeat the 250 field.
250:__; $a Updated edition.
250;__; $a First edition.
Guy Frost
Associate Professor of Library Science
Catalog Librarian
Odum Library/Valdosta State University
Valdosta, Georgia 31698-0150
229.259.5060
gfr...@valdosta.edu
FDLP 0125
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access <RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> on behalf of Baumgarten,
Richard, JCL <baumgart...@jocolibrary.org>
*Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2013 10:24 AM
*To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
*Subject:* [RDA-L] edition statements
I cannot find anywhere in 2.5 about a situation where the title page
says updated edition and the verso says First edition. The title was
previously published. Do I record both statements or only the
statement that I know to be true?
Richard Baumgarten
Cataloger
Johnson County Library
P.O. Box 2901
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66201-1301
(913) 826-4494
baumgart...@jocolibrary.org
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
