Re: [RDA-L] RDA rule equivalence AACR rule 21.23C1

[McDonald, Stephen]

I should expand on that, I guess.  6.28.1.5 indicates, among other things, that 
a performance of a musical work "involving substantial creative responsibility 
for adaptation, improvisation, etc., on the part of the performer or 
performers" counts as an adaptation, and the authorized access point is 
constructed from the title plus the performer, rather than the original author 
of the music.

So if the performer is considered to have adapted each of the works on the 
collective work, then he is the creator of each of them, and is also the 
creator of the collective work.  If, on the other hand, the performer did not 
really adapt the works, then the performer is not the creator of the collective 
work.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu


> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 4:14 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA rule equivalence AACR rule 21.23C1
> 
> I believe the relevant instructions are at RDA 6.28.1.5.
> 
>   Steve McDonald
>   steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
> > Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Don Charuk
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:42 PM
> > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> > Subject: [RDA-L] RDA rule equivalence AACR rule 21.23C1
> >
> > If I understand correctly there is no RDA rule that is equivalent to
> > AACR's
> > 21.23C1 "If a sound recording containing works by different persons or
> > bodies has a collective title, enter it under the heading for the
> > person or body represented as principal performer" So if I had a
> > recording by a pop singer (place your favorite singer here) singing
> > various jazz songs by different composers that singer would be
> > regarded as a "performer" contributing to an expression and coded in
> > MARC tag 700. Correct? If this is correct, this will create a lot of
> > problems for libraries who shelve their material by either "main entry" or
> via some means of cuttering.
> >
> > Don Charuk
> > Cataloguer/DBM Trainer
> > Cataloguing Dept.
> > Toronto Public Library
> > Email : dcha...@torontopubliclibrary.ca Phone : 416 393-7760

Re: [RDA-L] RDA rule equivalence AACR rule 21.23C1

[McDonald, Stephen]

I believe the relevant instructions are at RDA 6.28.1.5.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu


> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Don Charuk
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:42 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: [RDA-L] RDA rule equivalence AACR rule 21.23C1
> 
> If I understand correctly there is no RDA rule that is equivalent to AACR's
> 21.23C1 "If a sound recording containing works by different persons or
> bodies has a collective title, enter it under the heading for the person or
> body represented as principal performer" So if I had a recording by a pop
> singer (place your favorite singer here) singing various jazz songs by 
> different
> composers that singer would be regarded as a "performer" contributing to an
> expression and coded in MARC tag 700. Correct? If this is correct, this will
> create a lot of problems for libraries who shelve their material by either
> "main entry" or via some means of cuttering.
> 
> Don Charuk
> Cataloguer/DBM Trainer
> Cataloguing Dept.
> Toronto Public Library
> Email : dcha...@torontopubliclibrary.ca
> Phone : 416 393-7760

Re: [RDA-L] Titles of nobility

[McDonald, Stephen]

As I see it, 9.4.1.3 is simply saying that sometimes you record it as a 
separate element, sometimes as part of an access point, and sometimes as both.  
It isn't saying you always have a choice about it.  It directs you to 9.19.1.2 
for specific instructions on recording as part of an access point.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun
> Wiesenmüller
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 3:36 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: [RDA-L] Titles of nobility
> 
> I find it difficult to reconcile the following two RDA instructions concerning
> titles of nobility:
> 
> 9.4.1.3 (Recording Titles of Persons) says: "Record titles as separate
> elements, as parts of access points, or as both." This also refers to titles 
> of
> nobility (9.4.1.5). So 9.4.1.3 seems to allow for recording a title of 
> nobility as a
> separate element *only* (i.e. not also as part of the access point).
> 
> On the other hand, 9.19.1.1 (General Guidelines on Constructing Access
> Points to Represent Persons) says: "Make the additions specified at
> 9.19.1.2 even if they are not needed to distinguish access points representing
> different persons with the same name." 9.19.1.2 lists, among other things, "a
> title of (…) nobility (see 9.4.1.5)". So this rule seems to say that a title 
> of
> nobility must *always* be recorded as part of the access point.
> 
> This seems somewhat contradictory. Perhaps there is something I've
> overlooked?
> 
> Heidrun
> 
> 
> --
> -
> Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
> Stuttgart Media University
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi

Re: [RDA-L] Multiple bibliographic identities

[McDonald, Stephen]

Pamela Dearinger said:
> OCLC #779266283 is a recent example, not RDA, with a 100 for Vine, Barbara, a
> 700 for Rendell, Ruth, and this in the 245: "Ruth Rendell, writing as Barbara 
> Vine"
> and I find that helpful.  Isn't it good for people to know that Vine is a
> pseudonym for Rendell, and to see that multiple times, because we don't all 
> pay
> much otherwise.  I'm thinking as a reader, looking for a book by an author I 
> am
> familiar with, but not necessarily familiar with the pseudonyms.  

Unfortunately, that is probably a direct quotation from the title page of the 
book.  
That doesn't help us decide how to deal with cases where the book itself does 
not
tell us the name is a pseudonym.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Names found in a non-preferred script (8.4 vs. 9.2.2.5.3 and 11.2.2.12)

[McDonald, Stephen]

Heidrun Wiesenmüller said:
> The general rule in 8.4 says: "Record names in the language and script in
> which they appear on the sources from which they are taken." The
> alternative reads: "Record a transliterated form of the name either as a
> substitute for, or in addition to, the form that appears on the source."
> 
> So, although it is allowed to record names in a transliterated form, the basic
> rule is to record them in the original script.
> 
> However, in 9.2.2.5.3 we read: "If the name of a person is found in a script
> that differs from a preferred script of the agency creating the data,
> transliterate the name according to the scheme chosen by the agency."
> And, similarly, in 11.2.2.12: "If the name of the body is found in a script 
> that
> differs from a preferred script of the agency creating the data, transliterate
> the name according to the scheme chosen by the agency."
> 
> These rules seem to imply that names found in a non-preferred script should
> _always_ be transliterated. There doesn't seem to be any option of
> recording them in the original script.
> 
> Is it only me, or is there really a conflict between 8.4, on the one hand, and
> 9.2.2.5.3 and 11.2.2.12, on the other hand?

I believe it is the difference between "recording the name" and "recording the 
preferred name".  The General Guidelines on Recording Names (RDA 8.5) makes it 
clear that it is talking about recording the name as it appears in the item.  
On the other hand, RDA 8.6 talks of recording the authorized access point using 
the preferred name, and refers to RDA 9.2.2, 10.2.2, and 11.2.2 for how to do 
that.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

Re: [RDA-L] GMD - where is everyone on this?

[McDonald, Stephen]

We are leaving a GMD if it is present (in both AACR2 and RDA records), but we 
are not adding a GMD to an RDA record if one is not present.  We are following 
the principle of least work-it doesn't hurt our system right now if it is 
present in an old RDA record, but we won't add it.


Steve McDonald

steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 11:39 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] GMD - where is everyone on this?

Hi, everyone;

Could we get some postings on what others are doing now with the GMD? There are 
lots of opinions out there on this, I know.

Accepting but not displaying in OPAC?
Displaying? Etc.

Some rationales would be helpful too. My librarian thanks you!

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloguing PDF files.

[McDonald, Stephen]

It would not be subfield y.  Subfield y is a text phrase, not a path to the 
resource.  If you wanted to put it into subfield d, the path would be:
DATA-HT-01/Mapped Drives/Liberty Data/e-docs/3330004.pdf

But by putting a scheme in front of the path, you turn it into a URI.  "http" 
is the best known Universal Resource Indicator Scheme, but there are many 
others, like "ftp", "mailto", "ssh", "telnet", and "irc".  "file" is a valid 
URI scheme.  Therefore, file://DATA-HT-01/Mapped Drives/Liberty 
Data/e-docs/3330004.pdf
 should go into subfield u, along with any other URI.


Steve McDonald

steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Felix, Kyley
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2013 8:48 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Cataloguing PDF files.

When cataloguing PDF files, I'm wondering where the link should go in the 856 
tag? The format of the links is as follows:

file://DATA-HT-01/Mapped Drives/Liberty 
Data/e-docs/3330004.pdf

The PDF files are stored on our system, not on the Internet.

I was thinking perhaps 856 subfield (d) or(y) would be where it should go, but 
I'm not sure.

Many thanks.

Kyley Felix
Librarian
Parliamentary Library
Parliament House
Harvest Tce
Perth WA 6000
Phone: (08) 9222 7393


-
PARLIAMENT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
CONDITIONS OF USE, PUBLICATION, OR DISCLOSURE OF THIS EMAIL
APPLICABLE TO RECIPIENT

The content of this email (including any attachments)

- is provided for the use of the intended recipient only; and
- mere receipt in no way authorises any recipient to disclose or publish all or 
part of it to another person or in any form.

If this email relates to matters that were, or are being, considered by one or 
both Houses of Parliament or a committee of either or both Houses, any 
unauthorised use, publication or disclosure may amount to a breach of the 
privileges of the House(s).

A person who is not an intended recipient is requested to advise the sender and 
delete this email immediately.

Although this email has been scanned for viruses, this email is not guaranteed 
to be free of viruses and should be vetted by your own security mechanisms. The 
Parliament of Western Australia accepts no liability for any loss or damage 
arising from the use of this email or its attachments.

Re: [RDA-L] 264 with only a copyright date

[McDonald, Stephen]

Sorry, the copyright symbol in my reply got automatically changed to (c).  
That's what I get for replying in text format.  :(

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu


> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen
> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 1:49 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 264 with only a copyright date
> 
> Gene Fieg asked, regarding the inclusion of copyright date and inferred
> publication date in an RDA record:
> 
> > And how is the user supposed to make sense of this?
> > How are thesis advisors supposed to make sense of this when checking
> bibliographical citations?
> > How will it display
> 
> I don't see what you think is confusing about this.  The user will look for a
> publication date, and will find it.  What is confusing about that?  The same
> with thesis advisors.  What publication date do you think thesis advisors
> would expect to find?  This inferred publication date is only used when there
> is no evidence of a publication date except the copyright date.  A thesis
> advisor would almost certainly rather some guess of the publication date
> than no date at all.  I would note that theses generally don't have copyright
> dates, and do have other dates which can be inferred as publication date.  So
> this isn't usually an issue with theses anyway.
> 
> As for how it will display, that is up to the ILS, of course.  One reasonable 
> way
> (but hardly the only possible way) it could be displayed is:
>   Publication date:  [2011]
>   Copyright:  (c)2011
> 
> That's the way we have it set up in our catalog (Millennium, the same as you
> have, I believe).
> 
>   Steve McDonald
>   steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

Re: [RDA-L] 264 with only a copyright date

[McDonald, Stephen]

Gene Fieg asked, regarding the inclusion of copyright date and inferred 
publication date in an RDA record:

> And how is the user supposed to make sense of this?
> How are thesis advisors supposed to make sense of this when checking 
> bibliographical citations?
> How will it display

I don't see what you think is confusing about this.  The user will look for a 
publication date, and will find it.  What is confusing about that?  The same 
with thesis advisors.  What publication date do you think thesis advisors would 
expect to find?  This inferred publication date is only used when there is no 
evidence of a publication date except the copyright date.  A thesis advisor 
would almost certainly rather some guess of the publication date than no date 
at all.  I would note that theses generally don't have copyright dates, and do 
have other dates which can be inferred as publication date.  So this isn't 
usually an issue with theses anyway.

As for how it will display, that is up to the ILS, of course.  One reasonable 
way (but hardly the only possible way) it could be displayed is:
Publication date:  [2011]
Copyright:  (c)2011

That's the way we have it set up in our catalog (Millennium, the same as you 
have, I believe).

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

Re: [RDA-L] 260 and 264 Fields

[McDonald, Stephen]

Because the 264 allows you to have separate fields for production, publication, 
distribution, manufacture, and copyright, in accordance with RDA, coded so that 
machine processing can distinguish them.  The initial testing of RDA used the 
260, and based on the results it was felt that a new repeatable field with 
indicators was a better solution.


Steve McDonald

steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Mike McReynolds
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 9:44 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] 260 and 264 Fields

I've noticed that records with 264 fields and no 260 fields are starting to be 
imported to our catalog from OCLC.  Can anyone explain why the information 
presented in the 264 field is considered preferable or more informative than 
the information that has long been contained in the 260 fields?

Thank you for your thoughts on this.

Mike McReynolds
Cataloging / ILL Librarian
Shook, Hardy & Bacon
Kansas City

Re: [RDA-L] Use of brackets in RDA records

[McDonald, Stephen]

If you are following the instructions under 19.2.1.1.1 to determine that the 
publisher is also the creator, and the publisher name comes from the resource 
itself in accordance with 19.1.1, I don't believe that you need square brackets.


Steve McDonald

steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Crum, Cathy (KDLA)
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2013 9:20 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Use of brackets in RDA records

Hi all,

I have a question concerning the use of brackets and supplied information in 
RDA records.  I know that according to RDA 2.2.4, if you take information from 
outside the resource, you can enclose that information in square brackets, but 
what if the information is on the resource but is used for another RDA element?

We catalog numerous publications from state government agencies in which we 
only have a statement of responsibility in the imprint area, but not 
publication information.  In these cases, we might use the statement of 
responsibility to supply the publication information if we judge that the 
agency could also be considered the publisher of the resource.  Would we 
bracket this information in the 264 because it is supplied even though it does 
not come from outside the resource?

I know that this is similar to the situation of using of the copyright date to 
supply the publication date, but I would still like to hear thoughts on this 
topic.

Thanks,
Cathy

Cathy Crum
Cataloging Supervisor
State Library Services
Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives
(502) 564-8300, ext. 227
cathy.c...@ky.gov

Re: [RDA-L] fictitious characters in RDA

[McDonald, Stephen]

If a fictitious character were established as a 100 in a Name Authority Record 
and you wished to use it as a subject, you would have to establish a 650 
Subject Authority Record for the fictitious person.  This is explicitly stated 
in the LC-PCC-PS, including an example for Jessica Fletcher as a 100 and a 650.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu


> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2013 12:06 AM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] fictitious characters in RDA
> 
> Judy said:
> 
> >The 4th paragraph of RDA 9.0 indicates that the scope of *person* in
> >RDA includes "fictitious entities, such as literary figures, legendary
> >figures, ... if the fictitious entity's role is only as subject of the
> >resource, the RDA instructions do not apply.
> 
> 
> I find this exception impossible t apply.  If the fictitious character is 
> establihed
> as an RDA/MARC authority 100, how could you code the character as 650 in a
> particular bibliographic record?  For one thing, would it verify?
> 
> The factitious character's relation to one work might differ from that to
> another.  Is the person to be coded differently in different records?  Or is
> coding in all records controlled by the authority
> coding?   What if a character's relationship is different for a
> publication after the authority is established>
> 
> Seems to me if persons are to be treated as persons, it should be all the
> time, and all persons.  I include Geronimo Chilton.
> 
> Am I correct to assume God should now be 100/600 as opposed to 150/650?
> 
> 
>__   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
>   {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>   ___} |__
> \__

Re: [RDA-L] 2.3.1.6 Introductory words

[McDonald, Stephen]

Heidrun Wiesenmüller said:
> So, yes - I admit that we can arrive at a good solution, using only RDA and 
> hard 
> thinking. But as somebody who teaches cataloging, I can't help wondering: Why
> does RDA so often make it so very difficult? Having a straightforward looking 
> rule
> like 2.3.1.6, without giving any hint that there are cases which look just 
> like it, but
> should be treated quite differently, seems a certain way of creating undesired
> results. Therefore I would have liked to see a "but" example here to 
> illustrate
> these cases.

But this is not a new rule.  AACR2 had exactly the same rule.  We have been 
teaching
this rule and learning how to deal with it for over thirty years.  If you teach 
cataloging,
I hope you are aware of this.  There are certainly legitimate complaints about 
RDA,
particularly in clarity and examples.  But you cannot legitimately use this 
rule as an
example of how RDA is a step in the wrong direction, when it is the same as 
AACR2.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

Re: [RDA-L] order in 245 when title is more than one language,

[McDonald, Stephen]

I can understand the logic of that.  Would you also have a 246 field with the 
complete title in German, and a 246 with the complete title in English, with 
the B.446 in each?  That would seem to meet all needs.

Steve McDonald
steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 9:48 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] order in 245 when title is more than one language,
> 
> Jean Harden posted:
> 
> >Trio in G-Dur, Trio in G major, für Violine, Violoncello und Klavier,
> >for violin, cello and piano, B. 446
> 
> I would transcribe as:
> 
> 245 10 $aTrio in G-Dur =$bTrio in G major : für Violine, Violoncello und 
> Klavier
> = for violin, cello and piano, B. 446 /$c
> 
> rather than:
> 
> >Trio in G-Dur für Violine, Violoncello und Klavier = Trio in G major,
> >for violin, cello, and piano, B. 446
> 
> When in doubt, with RDA I suggest we transcribe what is there in the order
> given, with the exception of authors amd introductory words at head of titie.
> 
> This seems similar to the earlier statement of responsibility in German and
> English, but the names given only once.  If the names were given only once
> on the item, I would transcribe them only once.  We should represent what
> we are descrbing as nearly as possible.
> 
> 
>__   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
>   {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>   ___} |__
> \__

Re: [RDA-L] dimension of discs and end punctuations of 264 field

[McDonald, Stephen]

>From RDA 3.5.1.3 Recording Dimensions:
-
Unless instructed otherwise, record dimensions in centimetres to the next whole 
centimetre up, using the metric symbol cm (e.g., if the height measures 17.2 
centimetres, record 18 cm

Alternative:
Record dimensions in the system of measure preferred by the agency preparing 
the description. Abbreviate terms for units of measurement as instructed in 
appendix B (B.5.1), as applicable.
-

The LC-PCC PS says:
-
LC practice for Alternative: Use inches for discs (RDA 3.5.1.4.4) and for all 
audio carriers; otherwise, follow the RDA instruction as written.
-

The examples in the RDA Toolkit naturally follow the primary instructions in 
RDA, but many (most?) libraries will probably follow the Library of Congress 
recommendation and use inches for discs and audio carriers, continuing the 
practice from AACR2.


Steve McDonald

steve.mcdon...@tufts.edu

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Pam Withrow
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:01 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] dimension of discs and end punctuations of 264 field

The examples in the RDA Toolkit measure disc dimensions in centimeters rather 
than inches (as in AACR2).  Is this the new standard or cataloger's preference?

Pamela Withrow, MLIS
Cataloger
Perma-Bound
217-291-1144

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Joan Wang 
mailto:jw...@illinoisheartland.org>> wrote:
I think that it is an email address to ask questions.

Questions about RDA and LC's RDA plans may be directed to 
lchelp4...@loc.gov


Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System

On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Dawn Grattino 
mailto:dawn.gratt...@cpl.org>> wrote:

Forgive my ignorance. I have just seen mention of Lchelp4rda in two differnent 
postings today. Is it a list-serv that I could subscribe to? If so, how does 
one subscribe? Or is it simply an e-mail address where I could ask a question?



Thanks


Dawn Grattino
Senior Cataloger
Catalog Department
Cleveland Public Library
17133 Lakeshore Blvd.
Cleveland, OH 44110-4006
(phone) 216.623.2885
(fax)   216.623.6980
e-mail: dawn.gratt...@cpl.org
http://www.cpl.org


From: "Deborah Fritz" 
mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com>>
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 4:11:13 PM
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] dimension of discs and end punctuations of 264 field
Joan,

Yes, abbreviate 'inches' as 'in.' as per Appendix B, because 3.5.1.3 (which 
gives us the alternative to use the system of measure we prefer) says 
"Abbreviate terms for units of measurement as instructed in appendix 
B[http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png]
 
(B.5.1[http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png]),
 as applicable" and 'inches' is in that appendix and so is applicable.

Just last month, I asked Lchelp4rda when a 264 would ever end with a closing 
parenthesis or a question mark, and was told: probably never. So we might see 
an amendment (removing those punctuation marks as ending punctuation for this 
field) in the  LC PCC PS for 1.7.1 sometime (probably not soon, given the much 
more important stuff they need to get done first)

Hope this helps,
Deborah

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@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 Joan Wang
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:00 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] dimension of discs and end punctuations of 264 field

Two tiny questions:

For dimension of discs and all audio carrier, Library of Congress practice 
states "Record the diameter of discs in inches". Does it still follow RDA 
Appendix B about the abbreviation? In B.7, inch should be abbreviated. Just 
want to make sure.

For end punctuations of 264 filed, Library of Congress policy instructs 
"usually ends with a period, a closing parenthesis, a closing bracket, a 
question mark, or a hyphen". I can understand that the 264 field ends with a 
period, a closing bracket, or a hyphen. In what situations, it ends with a 
closing parenthesis, or a question mark? Any examples? I thought that a 
question mark is always included in square brackets.

Thank you.
--
Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D.
Cataloger -- CMC
Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Of