Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-08 Thread Brenndorfer, Thomas
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz Sent: March-07-13 6:03 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087 Thomas said: The basic problem is then thrown back to MARC

[RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Michael Borries
I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance. I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!). What troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections. I have no idea what to use for the subfield $e except perhaps contributor, and that doesn't seem correct. The term

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Kevin M Randall
@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087 I come to the collective wisdom looking for guidance. I have cataloged this record according to RDA standards (I hope!). What troubles me is the 710 for Polaroid Collections. I have no idea what to use for the subfield $e except perhaps

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Brenndorfer, Thomas
and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall Sent: March-07-13 5:17 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087 I don't believe there is any relationship designator yet defined in RDA appropriate for this particular relationship (and lots

Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087

2013-03-07 Thread Deborah Fritz
www.marcofquality.com From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 5:35 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (OCoLC)829311087 In looking at the examples