Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
What Dana has just posted is very helpful (great timing!) and I have just noticed that Mac answered a very similar one from me last time I was fiddling with some RDA bibs. Should've checked my saved replies, note to self. But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. Karen From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:33 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query I am just getting my toes wet with some RDA copy cataloguing based on LC bibs. Looking at the bib for Louise Erdrich's Round House, LCCN 2012005381. There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I have included: 264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?] 264_4 |ccopyright 2012 My queries: Since the author is identified on the tp verso as copyright holder, do I include her in the second (copyright) 264? I don't think I have seen that done, but does not to do so imply that Harper has the copyright? Should the square-bracketed inferred date in the first 264 have a question mark, or not. LC had it in 260 without copyright symbol. Haven't checked the publisher's website yet. This level of question will give someone a laugh, if nothing else. Karen
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
I just cataloged LCCN 2012007182 whose author holds the copyright and LC used your first pattern only (264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012]). Michael Mitchell Technical Services Librarian Brazosport College Lake Jackson, TX Michael.mitchell at brazosport.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:35 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query What Dana has just posted is very helpful (great timing!) and I have just noticed that Mac answered a very similar one from me last time I was fiddling with some RDA bibs. Should've checked my saved replies, note to self. But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. Karen From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:33 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query I am just getting my toes wet with some RDA copy cataloguing based on LC bibs. Looking at the bib for Louise Erdrich's Round House, LCCN 2012005381. There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I have included: 264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?] 264_4 |ccopyright 2012 My queries: Since the author is identified on the tp verso as copyright holder, do I include her in the second (copyright) 264? I don't think I have seen that done, but does not to do so imply that Harper has the copyright? Should the square-bracketed inferred date in the first 264 have a question mark, or not. LC had it in 260 without copyright symbol. Haven't checked the publisher's website yet. This level of question will give someone a laugh, if nothing else. Karen
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Karen Nelson posted:
There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I ha=
ve included:
264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?]
264_4 |ccopyright 2012
Yes, certainly the 260 should be changed to 264. Perhaps this was a test
record?
We would not use the question mark, not add the 264 4, since the year
is the same. Adding the 264 4 puts you in the strange position of
having date type t and the same year as dates one and two. That
looks silly, and adds nothing to retrieval.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.ca wrote: But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright … does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven’t seen it done so far. The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So all you'll get is: - 264 -4 $c ©2013 See RDA 2.11 for the instructions, if you have a copy. If you want to get into the copyright weeds, there's the 542 field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd542.html -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
According to RDA 2.11 Copyright date, record date associated with a claim of protection under copyright or a similar regime. RDA says nothing about recording who actually holds the copyright, so, no, you wouldn't do that. Also you can use either copyright or (c). On a Windows machine, a quick shortcut to produce the (c) symbol is to hold down the ALT key and type 0169 (doesn't work with the numbers above the letters). b Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 2:35 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query What Dana has just posted is very helpful (great timing!) and I have just noticed that Mac answered a very similar one from me last time I was fiddling with some RDA bibs. Should've checked my saved replies, note to self. But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. Karen From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:33 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query I am just getting my toes wet with some RDA copy cataloguing based on LC bibs. Looking at the bib for Louise Erdrich's Round House, LCCN 2012005381. There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I have included: 264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?] 264_4 |ccopyright 2012 My queries: Since the author is identified on the tp verso as copyright holder, do I include her in the second (copyright) 264? I don't think I have seen that done, but does not to do so imply that Harper has the copyright? Should the square-bracketed inferred date in the first 264 have a question mark, or not. LC had it in 260 without copyright symbol. Haven't checked the publisher's website yet. This level of question will give someone a laugh, if nothing else. Karen
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Should have said: hold down the ALT key and type 0169 on the number pad . Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 3:09 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query According to RDA 2.11 Copyright date, record date associated with a claim of protection under copyright or a similar regime. RDA says nothing about recording who actually holds the copyright, so, no, you wouldn't do that. Also you can use either copyright or (c). On a Windows machine, a quick shortcut to produce the (c) symbol is to hold down the ALT key and type 0169 (doesn't work with the numbers above the letters). b Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 2:35 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.camailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query What Dana has just posted is very helpful (great timing!) and I have just noticed that Mac answered a very similar one from me last time I was fiddling with some RDA bibs. Should've checked my saved replies, note to self. But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. Karen From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:33 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query I am just getting my toes wet with some RDA copy cataloguing based on LC bibs. Looking at the bib for Louise Erdrich's Round House, LCCN 2012005381. There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I have included: 264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?] 264_4 |ccopyright 2012 My queries: Since the author is identified on the tp verso as copyright holder, do I include her in the second (copyright) 264? I don't think I have seen that done, but does not to do so imply that Harper has the copyright? Should the square-bracketed inferred date in the first 264 have a question mark, or not. LC had it in 260 without copyright symbol. Haven't checked the publisher's website yet. This level of question will give someone a laugh, if nothing else. Karen
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Thanks, everyone! I'll get there eventually... I hope. I'm so glad our administrator agreed to fork out for the print version of RDA. I get so embroiled in ToolKit, even with all those online tutorials! Somehow, I still just love stuff on an actual PAGE. Call me a Luddite. kn From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:07 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.camailto:knel...@capilanou.ca wrote: But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So all you'll get is: - 264 -4 $c (c)2013 See RDA 2.11 for the instructions, if you have a copy. If you want to get into the copyright weeds, there's the 542 field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd542.html -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
No, the element is just copyright date. Only a date (preceded by (c) or (p) is recorded in 264 _4 $c. ^^ 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/~aschiff ~~ On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, Karen Nelson wrote: What Dana has just posted is very helpful (great timing!) and I have just noticed that Mac answered a very similar one from me last time I was fiddling with some RDA bibs. Should've checked my saved replies, note to self. But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. Karen From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 10:33 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query I am just getting my toes wet with some RDA copy cataloguing based on LC bibs. Looking at the bib for Louise Erdrich's Round House, LCCN 2012005381. There is a 260 in this one still. I want to edit it to 264(s). So far, I have included: 264_1|aNew York, NY :|bHarper,|c[2012] or maybe [2012?] 264_4 |ccopyright 2012 My queries: Since the author is identified on the tp verso as copyright holder, do I include her in the second (copyright) 264? I don't think I have seen that done, but does not to do so imply that Harper has the copyright? Should the square-bracketed inferred date in the first 264 have a question mark, or not. LC had it in 260 without copyright symbol. Haven't checked the publisher's website yet. This level of question will give someone a laugh, if nothing else. Karen
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
So, I get this bit now. But here's another question, can't find any clues in the resources so far. On t.p. verso of a title for which I have an RDA bib: the US and Canadian publication information. I know I do not have to include the latter, but in a Canadian university library, I still want to. Is the correct 264 as follows: 264_1$aNew York, NY :$bRandom House, Inc. ;$aToronto :$bRandom House of Canada Limited,|c[2012] Or do I use two 264's? I think the above is still correct, right? Two 264's (for publishers, that is, not for two entities performing different functions, such as pub and dist) are for multi-part serials only? This I hope will be my last question today. I will soon be giving Mac a run for his money as most frequent poster! ;) KN From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:07 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.camailto:knel...@capilanou.ca wrote: But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So all you'll get is: - 264 -4 $c (c)2013 See RDA 2.11 for the instructions, if you have a copy. If you want to get into the copyright weeds, there's the 542 field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd542.html -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Karen, You are correct. MARC field 264 is repeatable for successive publication statements (e.g., for a serial or integrating resource). For a book published simultaneously in two countries, or jointly by two publishers, it works just like the MARC 260. See: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 5:34 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query So, I get this bit now. But here's another question, can't find any clues in the resources so far. On t.p. verso of a title for which I have an RDA bib: the US and Canadian publication information. I know I do not have to include the latter, but in a Canadian university library, I still want to. Is the correct 264 as follows: 264_1$aNew York, NY :$bRandom House, Inc. ;$aToronto :$bRandom House of Canada Limited,|c[2012] Or do I use two 264's? I think the above is still correct, right? Two 264's (for publishers, that is, not for two entities performing different functions, such as pub and dist) are for multi-part serials only? This I hope will be my last question today. I will soon be giving Mac a run for his money as most frequent poster! ;) KN From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:07 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.camailto:knel...@capilanou.ca wrote: But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So all you'll get is: - 264 -4 $c (c)2013 See RDA 2.11 for the instructions, if you have a copy. If you want to get into the copyright weeds, there's the 542 field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd542.html -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Many thanks! KN From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 2:43 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query Karen, You are correct. MARC field 264 is repeatable for successive publication statements (e.g., for a serial or integrating resource). For a book published simultaneously in two countries, or jointly by two publishers, it works just like the MARC 260. See: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Karen Nelson Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 5:34 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query So, I get this bit now. But here's another question, can't find any clues in the resources so far. On t.p. verso of a title for which I have an RDA bib: the US and Canadian publication information. I know I do not have to include the latter, but in a Canadian university library, I still want to. Is the correct 264 as follows: 264_1$aNew York, NY :$bRandom House, Inc. ;$aToronto :$bRandom House of Canada Limited,|c[2012] Or do I use two 264's? I think the above is still correct, right? Two 264's (for publishers, that is, not for two entities performing different functions, such as pub and dist) are for multi-part serials only? This I hope will be my last question today. I will soon be giving Mac a run for his money as most frequent poster! ;) KN From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:07 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query Karen Nelson knel...@capilanou.camailto:knel...@capilanou.ca wrote: But I am still wondering about the issue of the author holding copyright ... does her name go in the second 264, if a second one is kept? Haven't seen it done so far. The 264 field dedicated to copyright is for the date alone--that's it. So all you'll get is: - 264 -4 $c (c)2013 See RDA 2.11 for the instructions, if you have a copy. If you want to get into the copyright weeds, there's the 542 field: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd542.html -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] another (basic) 264 query
Karen Nelson posted:
264_1$aNew York, NY :$bRandom House, Inc. ;$aToronto :$bRandom House of Can=
ada Limited,|c[2012]
We think one 264 works best. We would have onl one 264 with the same
indicator(s). However, come Bibframe as now conceived, if the two
publishers assign different ISBNs, you would have two Instances, even
if items are identical. Let's hope Bibframe works this out before
implemenation.
NARC21 264 has no such example, but the subfields are shpwn as
repeating:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html
Field 260 does have such an example:
260 ##$aParis :$bGauthier-Villars ;$aChicago :$bUniversity of
Chicago Press,$c1955.
We would add , Ontario or [Ontario] after Toronto in your
example; and , France, or [France] after Paris, and
, Illinois or [Illinois] after Chicago in the sample above.
It's easier to always transcribe or add jurisdiction than to ponder,
as well as making the record more helpful internationally.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
