Re: [RDA-L] GMD - where is everyone on this?
* The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the postmas...@bl.uk : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent. The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. * Think before you print -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] GMD revisited
In two of the three libraries where I volunteer, I have been instructed to add the GMD back in. Apparently, at least from what I have been told, both patrons and librarians like to know that something is, e.g., a movie or a sound recording from looking at the record in the online catalog. So far, at least, RDA seems to be more work. Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] RDA dtst t + a 260/264 muse on training question
I have found this 264 _1 with 264 _4 coding to be a major time consumer when using RDA. For my local system, I must now copy what I put in 264 _4, e.g. ©2010 into 264 _1, delete the former, and then download. I fail to see what the repetition of what I put into these two MARC fields accomplishes for users, and it wastes time. Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] Date of publication not identified DtSt, Dates
Deborah et al., I find this latest twist in the road irritating. :-\ I do not see the abandonment of 260 and going to this more complicated way to expressing publication/copyright year as adding anything in information to the user. In the public library where I now volunteer as a retired cataloger, I must retrofit each and every RDA record I create to eliminate the $c in the second 264 and put it into the first; lots of extra manual work, with no clear added advantage for library users. But I do it, 'cause them's the rules. :-\ I also must re-add $h to all of my 245s when cataloging under RDA, because the collection development librarians want the format included in the title. (I know; I know; I'm supposed to educate them, but they still want things the way they have been.) So cataloging under RDA is taking significantly more time than cataloging with RDA did. Not to speak of 336-338, which so far is of no use to anybody. But I remain hopeful that all these hoops will result in practical benefit to users. On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 2:54 PM, Deborah Fritz debo...@marcofquality.comwrote: ** You might find (LC-PCC PS for *2.8.6.6*http://access.rdatoolkit.org/2.8.6.6.html ) helpful. I believe that PS would have you do: 264 _1 … $c[2005] 264 _4 $c©2005 DtSt = t Dates = 2005, 2005 Basically, LC suggests that you supply a date if known or probable, guess one if at all possible, using a copyright date, distribution date, first printing date, or some other method, and make a broad guess if that is all you can do, as per *1.9.2* http://access.rdatoolkit.org/1.9.2.html. IOW, do everything you can to guess a publication date, because if you cannot put *something* down for that element and have to enter [date of publication not identified], then, as far as I can see, you will need to do this: 264 _1 … $c [date of publication not identified] 264 _2 … $c [date of distribution not identified] 264 _3 … $c [date of manufacture not identified] DtSt = n Dates = , This basically takes us way back to the pre-AACR days when we could do [n.d.] (no date), but then makes that option so unpleasant that we will stick to the AACR principle of always putting down a date of publication, no matter how wild our guess has to be. I may be way off base about this, so I would very much like to hear what the collective wisdom has to say about my interpretation of the 'Core' instructions for Date of Distribution (*2.9.6*http://access.rdatoolkit.org/2.9.6.html ) and Date of Manufacture (*2.10.6*http://access.rdatoolkit.org/2.10.6.html ); i.e.: · *** Date of distribution is a core element for a resource in a published form if the date of publication is not identified.*-- therefore if [date of publication not identified], and you have no date of distribution either, then enter [date of distribution not identified], for a single-part resource (*2.9.6.6*http://access.rdatoolkit.org/2.9.6.6.html ) · *** Date of manufacture is a core element for a resource in a published form if neither the date of publication, the date of distribution, nor the copyright date is identified.*--therefore if [date of publication not identified], and [date of distribution not identified], and you have no date of manufacture either, then enter [date of manufacturenot identified] , for a single-part resource (*2.10.6.6*http://access.rdatoolkit.org/2.10.6.6.html ) 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 RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Snow, Karen Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 10:02 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Date of publication not identified DtSt, Dates I've done a little searching and can't find the answer, so I am hoping the collective wisdom can help me out... If you use [date of publication not identified] in 264_1 $c and you have a copyright date in 264_4 (let's say 2005), how would this look in DtSt and Dates fixed fields? DtSt = t Dates = , 2005 ? Thanks in advance for your help, Karen Karen Snow, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Graduate School of Library Information Science Dominican University 7900 West Division Street River Forest, IL 60305 ks...@dom.edu 708-524-6077 (office) 708-524-6657 (fax) -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] Transcription of more than one publisher
Hello, Pamela! LC announced the implementation of the 264 MARC field in June. The last time I looked, OCLC still had nothing about it, but you can get the basic layout at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html 264 requires a second indicator, usually #1 (publication) and/or #4 (copyright). We're now also supposed to add another 264 with just $c; examples are given at the above website. My OCLC template still only supplies 260. On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Pam Withrow withr...@perma-bound.comwrote: RDA Toolkit says this information goes in the 260 field, but this isn't the first time I've seen the 264 field used. Could someone please clarify? Thanks, Pamela Withrow Cataloger Perma-Bound Books Jacksonville, IL 62650 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Snow, Karen ks...@dom.edu wrote: I am trying to determine what to transcribe in 264$b for the following publication information (on the title page of the work): Vintage Departures Vintage Books A Division of Random House, Inc. New York (Note: Vintage Departures is printed using slightly larger font than the other names and New York) Rule 2.8.4.5 says to transcribe publisher names in the order indicated by the sequence, layout, or typography of the names on the source of information. It does not mention anything about subsidiaries. Would this transcription of the above information be correct? 264 _1 $a New York : $b Vintage Departures : $b Vintage Books : $b A Division of Random House, Inc. Thank you in advance for your help. Karen Snow, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Graduate School of Library Information Science Dominican University 7900 West Division Street River Forest, IL 60305 ks...@dom.edumailto:ks...@dom.edu 708-524-6077 (office) 708-524-6657 (fax) -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] Order of subfields in 040
Hmmm. I've been adding $e rda at the end of the string; then, if and when I make additions and/or changes, the $d follows the $e. Does this matter? I think OCLC will arrange things in the 040 any way it likes. On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Michael Cohen mco...@library.wisc.eduwrote: The RDA Workform for Books includes this field (where XXX = OCLC institution code): XXX ǂb ǂe rda ǂc XXX and MARC Field Help for 040 instructs: Enter subfield ‡e immediately after subfield ‡a. So which is wrong, the Workform or the Field Help? -- __**__ Michael L. Cohen Interim Head, Cataloging Department General Library System University of Wisconsin-Madison 324C Memorial Library 728 State Street Madison, WI 53706-1494 Phone: (608) 262-3246Fax: (608) 262-4861 Email: mco...@library.wisc.edu -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] RDA and subject access
I recently took a Getting Ready for RDA course offered by ALA. The teacher was Paul Weiss of OCLC. I did a version of the New Testament published by Jimmy Swaggart Ministries (OCLC #785210612). I was unsure of whether to override the abbreviation N.T. in my 630. Paul told me that what I had done was, as far as he was concerned, correct; he said that OCLC will, at some point after the national adoption of RDA, globally upgrade subjects to RDA standards. Doing the authorized access point using RDA but not applying the same standard to the subject seemed jarring to me, but that's what I was told and that's what I did. Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
[RDA-L] Christianity-centric terminology in RDA
All: I catalog as a volunteer at the Sosnick Library, Temple B'nai Israel in Sacramento, CA. I confess to some puzzlement as to why RDA has not apparently chosen to update dates to non-Christian-centric terminology, e.g. BC/AD -- BCE/CE. These terms have been in common usage now for many years (at least thirty, judging by what I have been able to find). Shouldn't RDA be moving into the twenty-first century when it comes to all aspects of cataloging? Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] 260 vs 264 fields
Thanks for the correction. I will study the results. But the preceding post suggests to me that I hold off on using 264 until I am informed to do so. I welcome constructive criticism. On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Dr. Robert Ellett elle...@gmail.comwrote: If Mr. Haughton would revise his search to: dx:rda and dm:2012 and dm:20120713 he will discover that over 100 RDA records were added to OCLC on Friday, the 13th. Robert -- Robert O. Ellett,, Ph.D. Lecturer School of Library and Information Science San Jose State University On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Adam L. Schiff asch...@u.washington.eduwrote: Up until the implementation of OCLC MARC Update 2012 earlier this spring, field 264 could not yet be used. But I have been using it in records, so your search is either not retrieving all the records or you just did not yet come across the relatively few that would have it. ^^** Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/**~aschiffhttp://faculty.washington.edu/%7Easchiff ~~** On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Buzz Haughton wrote: I just now did a search of Connexion for: dx:rda/bks/2013 and found every record I looked at, including PCC records, with the 260. So something isn't right here. On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.org wrote: This is also my understanding. According to the PCC guideline, 264 field should appear in all new RDA records. Joan On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Mills, Deborah deborah_mi...@ago.net wrote: So is the 260 field now obsolete, and won't be used at all in RDA? Instead will we use one or more 264 fields? Deborah Mills Cataloguer E.P. Taylor Research Library Art Gallery of Ontario 317 Dundas Street West Toronto, Ontario Canada M5T 1G4 e-mail: deborah_mi...@ago.net ph: 416-979-6660 ext. 390 fax: 416-979-6602 -- Joan Wang Cataloger -- CMC Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office) 6725 Goshen Road Edwardsville, IL 62025 618.656.3216x209 618.656.9401Fax -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com -- Buzz Haughton 1861 Pebblewood Dr Sacramento CA 95833 USA (916) 468-9027 bongob...@gmail.com
Re: [RDA-L] How RDA is everything going to be?
I volunteer as a cataloger at the Yolo County Library (Woodland, CA); I'm retired as a cataloger from UC Davis. YCL implemented RDA ca six months ago; I follow OCLC protocol, I.e. don't retrofit AACR2 records unless they are K- or M-level. At the request of the public-service librarians, I add the $h to the 245 after adding the RDA record to the Connexion database. Apparently they like to generate title lists and want to know what is print and what isn't. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 2, 2012, at 7:56 AM, Guy Vernon Frost gfr...@valdosta.edu wrote: 1. Most of it 2. Currently creating hybrids (records lack 336-338, 040 $e, DESC: i) everything else RDA 3. As of this moment: keep 260 [s.l.] : [s.n.], [s.d.]… but our policy could change Guy Frost, B.M.E., M.M.E., M.L.S., Ed.S Catalog Librarian/Facilitator of Technical Processing Associate Professor of Library Science Odum Library, Valdosta State University Valdosta, GA 31698-0150 Depository 0125 229-259-5060 ; FAX 229-333-5862 gfr...@valdosta.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kelleher, Martin Sent: Monday, July 02, 2012 5:43 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] How RDA is everything going to be? Hi all Now that the BL are apparently implementing RDA, we're considering what we're actually going to do at the University of Liverpool. This will partly be dependent on the extent of take up in the industry as a whole, so I was wondering if I could conduct an informal poll - all responses gratefully accepted! 1. How much of RDA are you (planning on) implementing? 1. When did you/will you implement RDA? 3. Are there any aspects of AACR2 you are planning on retaining? (Make answers as super-brief or lengthy as you wish, and obviously put none/never/as little as possible or whatever reply is relevant if such is the case!) If anyone knows of any similar survey I may have missed, I'd be grateful if you could let me know about it! Thanks Martin Kelleher Electronic Resources/Bibliographic Services Librarian University of Liverpoo
