Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation
Just to be clear: Is a comma also used to separate a $e from a name ending with a punctuation mark other than a hyphen, such as a period, question mark, or closing parenthesis? E.g. $aBlack Foot,$cChief,$dd. 1877$c(Spirit) $aEl-Abiad, Ahmed H. $aCarpaccio, Vittore,$d1455?-1525? I'm guessing yes, because the hyphen has always been sort of an odd man out (the idea being that space had to be left on the card to fill in the death date when the person died). Liz O'Keefe Elizabeth O'Keefe Director of Collection Information Systems The Morgan Library Museum 225 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016-3405 TEL: 212 590-0380 FAX: 212-768-5680 NET: eoke...@themorgan.org Visit CORSAIR, the Library’s comprehensive collections catalog, now on the web at http://corsair.themorgan.org Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.com 3/12/2013 5:38 PM For preceding the $e with a comma, see the LC PCC PS for 1.7.1 Access Points in Name Authority and Bibliographic Records (General) http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1target=lcps1-223#lcps 1-223 target=lcps1-223#lcps1-223 1. Punctuation/spacing within access points. Use internal punctuation to set off unambiguously the units of access points (including name/title portions of name/title fields). The marks of punctuation for this purpose are a period ( . ), a comma ( , ), a quotation mark ( ), a question mark ( ? ), an exclamation mark ( ! ), and a hyphen ( - ). What other mark of punctuation would you use for a relationship designator? And see the examples given in MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx00.html Under: e - Relator term Designation of function that describes the relationship between a name and a work, e.g., ed., comp., ill., tr., collector, joint author. 700 1#$aSmith, Elsie,$d1900-1945,$eillustrator. 700 1#$aHecht, Ben,$d1893-1964,$ewriting,$edirection,$eproduction. For not including the comma when the field preceding the $e ends with a hyphen, see the same LC PCC PS instruction. If you have provided one mark of punctuation, you do not need to add another mark of punctuation. And see the example given in MARC 21 Bib at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd100.html 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 M. E. Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:55 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation Michael Chopey cho...@hawaii.edu wrote: I don't know where the instruction for preceding the $e with a comma is to be found, nor the instruction not to include the comma when the field preceding the $e ends with a hyphen. The closest I ever got: A comma is used ... to separate date, number, place, or designation from the name or heading... (AACR1, North American edition, p. 369). Page 10 refers to comp., ed., etc., as designations of function. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation
Mark K. Ehlert wrote: That may be LC's intention. Playing devil's avacado, though, is a relationship designator within [the] access points? I've contended for a long time--based on nothing more than my gut feeling, really--that designators are outside the heading/access point proper. They're something else; spelled out codes, I sometimes call them. [DF:] Good point, I agree that designators are not part of the Authorized Access Point-RDA makes that pretty clear, since they are a separate element. So, you are right, Mark, that LC PCC PS won't help here. Drat. So, we are left with only the examples in the MARC manual(s) I'd be happier with explicit instructions over a handful of examples. [DF:] Again, I agree with you, Mark-I wish I could find an actual instruction for this, but cannot. So we might just have to go with the *logic* of the LC PCC PS-we *do* need something to to set off unambiguously the relationship designator when it is displayed. And the MARC manuals indicate that this should be a comma for $e and no punctuation for $4 (since it is not intended for display, as entered). $e is intended for display in the form in which it is entered; at least for now. Therefore, it needs separating punctuation. For an example, see the LC OPAC display of LCCN 2010922248 700 1_ |a Helquist, Brett, |e illustrator. Displays as: Related namesHelquist, Brett, illustrator. It is my understanding that $4 is *not* intended for display in the form in which it is entered. It is meant to be converted, either as a label or as a spelled out form. Therefore, it does not need separating punctuation in the record; when it is displayed, since it needs manipulation anyway, it can either be given a 'following' colon, or a 'preceding' comma, as appropriate. If it had been a $e instead of $f, then, it could display either of these ways: 700 1_ |a Helquist, Brett. |4 ill Displays as: Related names:Helquist, Brett, illustrator. Or displays as: Illustrator:Helquist, Brett. Won't it be great when all punctuation is handled by the presentation choices in our displays, so that we don't have to think this way anymore? But then we'd better hope that the designers of the presentation displays understand these issues! Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com debo...@marcofquality.com http://www.marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com
Re: [RDA-L] S-o-R/RDA 2.4.1.4
Joan, I think you're assuming that an authority record will be created for every new name cataloged under RDA. In practice, I doubt this will happen.. Does AACR2 state explicitly that affiliations are to be left out of the statement of responsibility? I don't see anything in 1.1F7 that seems to apply. We are told to omit, except under certain circumstances: titles and abbreviations of titles of nobility, address, honour, and distinction, initials of societies, qualifications, date(s) of founding, mottoes, etc. [followed by the exceptions]. The only term I could pick out was qualifications, but it seems a stretch to include affiliations under that category. None of the examples address affiliations so one could infer that the rule does not apply to such cases. In the actual examples of omissions, leaving out Dr. in Dr. Harry Smith detracts from identification (ex. 1), the Library Association (ex. 2) seems like a pretty generic name so including the date of founding can't hurt, and the late from by the late T.A. Rennard (ex. 3) tells us that the manifestation was published posthumously. I think leaving in the extras enhances identification. It is not clear to me whether the list of omissions is to include religious titles, although this seems to be a common practice. The advantage of the representation principle for the statement of responsibility is simplicity. If you follow the AACR2 path it results in a whole mess of complicated decisions on what to leave in and what to leave out. I also think the RDA principle supports identification of the persons listed in the statement of responsibility, and, in some cases, suggests the author's point of view. It would help in making an authority record created retroactively (remembering the pre AACR2 practice of leaving out the statement of responsibility which was much deplored). The best practice for punctuation in order to demarcate person from affiliation has been a problem for me so very much like Kevin Randall's suggestion. Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Joan Wang Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 1:27 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] S-o-R/RDA 2.4.1.4 All of this information on persons' affiliations could be recorded in our authority records -- is it really necessary to repeat it all in our bibliographic records as well? I got an impression that one day data represented in authority records could be viewed or searched in end-users' clients. Thanks, Joan Wang Illinois Heartland Library System On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Charles Croissant crois...@slu.edu wrote: I too would like to add my voice in support of Ben's position. Applying 2.4.1.4 as it stands, without applying the optional admission, is bound to lead in some cases to extremely lengthy and hard-to-read statements of responsibility, especially when four or more authors and/or editors are named on the title page, with each name followed by an affiliation. Is this truly what the JSC and LC/PCC intended with this wording and this policy statement? I understand the value of RDA's principle of representation, but, like Ben, I see a need for balance as well. All of this information on persons' affiliations could be recorded in our authority records -- is it really necessary to repeat it all in our bibliographic records as well? Charles Croissant Senior Catalog Librarian Pius XII Memorial Library Saint Louis University St. Louis, MO 63108 On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu wrote: Gene, I wish it were so. But 2.4.1.4 states, Transcribe a statement of responsibility in the form in which it appears on the source of information. Immediately followed by the optional omission, Abridge a statement of responsibility only if it can be abridged without loss of essential information. I have looked in vain for something similar to AACR2 1.1F7., Include titles and abbreviations of titles of nobility, address, honour, and distinction ... Otherwise, omit all such data from statements of responsibility, and not found it. I have also queried the RDA luminaries on this list and been told that including affiliations if they appear on the t.p. is part of RDA's adherence to principle of representation. The fact that there are no examples of this in RDA just means JSC either didn't think of it or didn't want to get into it. Moreover the example I copied to the list was one I found in OCLC (there are plenty more of them, if you start looking). So, if this is not what RDA intends, the rules need to be made clearer, as it's how catalogers are interpreting it. Personally I
Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation
Without clear instructions (only examples in the MARC manuals) all I can tell you is that in an LC database of 3,610,157 records, I found the following: 700:.,$e18372 --e.g., $aEl-Abiad, Ahmed H.,$e 700:.$e 512--e.g., $aEl-Abiad, Ahmed H.$e 700:),$e3142--e.g., $aBlack Foot,$cChief,$dd. 1877$c(Spirit),$e 700:)$e 190--e.g., $aBlack Foot,$cChief,$dd. 1877$c(Spirit)$e 700:?,$e212 --e.g., $aCarpaccio, Vittore,$d1455?-1525?,$e 700:?$e 0 --e.g., $aCarpaccio, Vittore,$d1455?-1525?$e 700:-$e 25755 --e.g., $aPreston, Jeff, $d 1958-$e 700:-,$e665 --e.g., $aPreston, Jeff, $d 1958-,$e 700:- ,$e 247 --e.g., $aPreston, Jeff, $d 1958- ,$e 700:!,$e0 700:!$e 0 So, I would say that you are correct, that we *do* add the comma after a period, or any other mark of punctuation, *except* the hyphen. What we don't want to see is no separating punctuation for this subfield, since some sort of punctuation is needed for display 700:$e 541 --e.g., $aGeehan, Wayne $e Explicit, official, instructions would be very useful, just to eliminate confusion. Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. debo...@marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Elizabeth O'Keefe Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 7:37 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation Just to be clear: Is a comma also used to separate a $e from a name ending with a punctuation mark other than a hyphen, such as a period, question mark, or closing parenthesis? E.g. $aBlack Foot,$cChief,$dd. 1877$c(Spirit) $aEl-Abiad, Ahmed H. $aCarpaccio, Vittore,$d1455?-1525? I'm guessing yes, because the hyphen has always been sort of an odd man out (the idea being that space had to be left on the card to fill in the death date when the person died). Liz O'Keefe Elizabeth O'Keefe Director of Collection Information Systems The Morgan Library Museum 225 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016-3405 TEL: 212 590-0380 FAX: 212-768-5680 NET: eoke...@themorgan.org Visit CORSAIR, the Library’s comprehensive collections catalog, now on the web at http://corsair.themorgan.org Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.com 3/12/2013 5:38 PM For preceding the $e with a comma, see the LC PCC PS for 1.7.1 Access Points in Name Authority and Bibliographic Records (General) http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1target=lcps1-223#lcps 1-223 target=lcps1-223#lcps1-223 1. Punctuation/spacing within access points. Use internal punctuation to set off unambiguously the units of access points (including name/title portions of name/title fields). The marks of punctuation for this purpose are a period ( . ), a comma ( , ), a quotation mark ( ), a question mark ( ? ), an exclamation mark ( ! ), and a hyphen ( - ). What other mark of punctuation would you use for a relationship designator? And see the examples given in MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx00.html Under: e - Relator term Designation of function that describes the relationship between a name and a work, e.g., ed., comp., ill., tr., collector, joint author. 700 1#$aSmith, Elsie,$d1900-1945,$eillustrator. 700 1#$aHecht, Ben,$d1893-1964,$ewriting,$edirection,$eproduction. For not including the comma when the field preceding the $e ends with a hyphen, see the same LC PCC PS instruction. If you have provided one mark of punctuation, you do not need to add another mark of punctuation. And see the example given in MARC 21 Bib at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd100.html 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 M. E. Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:55 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Relator code and term punctucation Michael Chopey cho...@hawaii.edu wrote: I don't know where the instruction for preceding the $e with a comma is to be found, nor the instruction not to include the comma when the field preceding the $e ends with a hyphen. The closest I ever got: A comma is used ... to separate date, number, place, or designation from the name or heading... (AACR1, North American edition, p. 369). Page 10 refers to comp., ed., etc., as designations of function. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
[RDA-L] Numbered and Unnumbered Sequences
RDA-L readers, I found this as a pagination statement: [xvii], 219 pages The source has no initial sequence with roman numerals. I have not found instructions for use of brackets with supplied page numbering. Nor does the bibliographic record refer elsewhere to unnumbered preliminary pages. Please tell: is use of a supplied and bracketed-in sequence such as this covered in any RDA documentation? I'd expect it to be found here: 3.4.5.3.1 Numbered and Unnumbered Sequences Thanks - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
[RDA-L] eBooks Playaways
RDA-L readers: Granted that a Playaway can be judged as unmediated. But nevertheless, something that arose earlier in this discussion caught my attention: the suggested use of other with media type audio. Surely other is only established as controlled vocabulary for use when 338 = unmediated? I do not see other listed under other media types, unless I missed something. I don't like that - but am I right, that's the way things are? Sincerely - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
[RDA-L] RDA instructions for accompanying material?
RDA-L readers, Final comment for the night :-) RDA does not seem to handle accompanying material, such as a DVD disc published with a book, in quite the way of the past. If you try the easy way of going to AACR2 1.5E and clicking on the RDA link, it takes you to27.1.1.3 Referencing Related Manifestations (where an LC PCC PS link appears to be addressing a totally different concern.). I saw nothing in RDA advising to add a description of the disc after the description of the book. I tried another easy way, via Appendix D.2.1 Mapping of MARC 21 Bibliographic to RDAunder field 300e, only to be directed to the same RDA instruction. My view of this scenario is that both AACR2 and MARC represent a view of accompanying material that must eventually be deprecated in favor of RDA's approach. But that is pretty radical talk. I found an example of an RDA record where accompanying material has been handled in field 300e as in the past, and it was investigation of this situation that led me to my failure to find instructions in support thereof. Am I right? Or am I missing something? Sincerely - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
