Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-22 Thread Dawn Grattino
) 216.623.2885 (fax)   216.623.6980 e-mail: dawn.gratt...@cpl.org http://www.cpl.org - Original Message - From: "Julie Moore" To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 4:10:17 PM Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD P

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-18 Thread J. McRee Elrod
Greta said: >So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= >ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that mean that they would still be catalo= >ged as unpublished? No, All online resources are considered to be published. even if using provider neutral records. The fix

Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-18 Thread Julie Moore
thesis from the record for > the print manuscript, you'd need to change the type code to textual > material and supply a place of publication and publisher. > > Adam > > -Original Message- From: Greta de Groat > Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:55 AM > To: RDA-L@LI

Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-18 Thread Adam Schiff
Adam -Original Message- From: Greta de Groat Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 9:55 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Why would this be an exception to the P-N practice? I don't see it addressed there as an exce

Re: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-18 Thread Greta de Groat
Libraries - Original Message - From: "Paradis Daniel" To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2013 8:15:10 AM Subject: [RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD With the latest update to the RDA Toolkit, instruction 2.8.1.1 now includes the

[RDA-L] RE : [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-18 Thread Paradis Daniel
de J. McRee Elrod Date: ven. 2013-05-17 23:12 À: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD Greta asked: >So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= >ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that me

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-17 Thread J. McRee Elrod
Greta asked: >So, if we are supposed to be cataloging online monographs according to Prov= >ider-neutral guidelines, wouldn't that mean that they would still be catalo= >ged as unpublished? If it is electronic, it is considered published. J. McRee (Mac) Elrod 4493 Lindholm Road Victoria BC

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-17 Thread Greta de Groat
#x27;t one already) Greta de Groat Stanford University Libraries. - Original Message - From: "SEVIM MCCUTCHEON" To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 5:25:31 AM Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD A decision was made som

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-05-17 Thread MCCUTCHEON, SEVIM
2013 6:32 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD I think that you indicate a very interesting problem. US dissertations have been considered unpublished since universities stopped issuing them with a dissertation note.

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-21 Thread James Weinheimer
On 21/03/2013 12:26, Bernhard Eversberg wrote: > Am 21.03.2013 12:01, schrieb Elizabeth O'Keefe: >> Is part of the problem that we use published versus unpublished as a >> dividing line for textual material but not for other types of material? > > Well, apart from the difficulty of drawing it, th

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-21 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
Am 21.03.2013 12:01, schrieb Elizabeth O'Keefe: Is part of the problem that we use published versus unpublished as a dividing line for textual material but not for other types of material? Well, apart from the difficulty of drawing it, the Lubetzkian question has to be asked: Is this dividing

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-21 Thread Elizabeth O'Keefe
Is part of the problem that we use published versus unpublished as a dividing line for textual material but not for other types of material? Typescripts or unpublished items produced with a printing press or even Word documents can be coded as "manuscript" though they are not handwritten, but the

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-21 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
20.03.2013 15:49, Laurence S. Creider: Second, I agree that the notion of publication needs reconsideration in light of a longer consideration of the history of the book from ancient times until now. I do not think that "anything fit for public reception" is a workable definition. For our pur

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-20 Thread Laurence S. Creider
Bernhard, First off, thank you for continuing to contribute. I have learned a great deal from your posts. Second, I agree that the notion of publication needs reconsideration in light of a longer consideration of the history of the book from ancient times until now. I do not think that "anythin

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-20 Thread Laurence S. Creider
Mac, > With 264 0, the distinction means little in RDA. Only one fixed field and 264 2nd indicator are affected. This is not RDA, it is MARC. I have said for some time that I think that the whole continuum from unpublished to published needs to be rethought in light of the history of the book (m

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
19.03.2013 21:58, J. McRee Elrod: Theses are produced in one or a very few number of copies, without editorial review or peer review in the same way that published monographs are made. .. For consistency we should consider electronic theses as published. That print ones are not is a fiction

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread J. McRee Elrod
Adam said: >Even printed theses by computer have always been considered unpublished >manuscripts rather than published textual monographs With 264 0, the distinction means little in RDA. Only one fixed field and 264 2nd indicator are affected. >Theses are produced in one or a very few number of

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Joan Milligan
My understanding is that back in 2007 when the OhioLINK libraries drew up a standard for ETDs, there were many long philosophical discussions about the published vs. unpublished status. These concluded when OCLC said they consider ETDs to be published. At my library we have therefore been coding th

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Adam L. Schiff
Even printed theses by computer have always been considered unpublished manuscripts rather than published textual monographs, so I am not sure that it matters if one has a printout from the computer file or a digital image of the file contents. Theses are produced in one or a very few number o

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Joan Wang
Adam I remember that I asked the question before, and got an answer Yes. If we do not consider ETDs published, do we consider them manuscripts? The following is the definition of manuscript from RDA Toolkit: 1) In general, a text, musical score, map, etc., inscribed or written entirely by hand,

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Adam L. Schiff
I've always had a problem with considering ETDs published, although I understand that for practical purposes it is easier to consider everything available via remote access as published. But I really don't see an electronic dissertation as anything less of a manuscript than a printed one. Par

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-19 Thread Myers, John F.
Which perhaps begs the question of why have two different Type codes for the same kind of content? (Which I acknowledge is an encoding and communication format question rather than an RDA question.) John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian Schaffer Library, Union College Schenectady NY 12308 mye...@un

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-18 Thread Laurence Creider
I think that you indicate a very interesting problem. US dissertations have been considered unpublished since universities stopped issuing them with a dissertation note. On-demand microfilms or photocopies are still considered unpublished. On the other hand, most people would consider a docu

[RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

2013-03-18 Thread Joan Milligan
Could someone confirm for me that the example for an online dissertation has an error: http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/SCT%20RDA%20Records%20TG/index.html Record 5, Holzapfel, "Structural Analysis of Active Site Conformations..." I believe the "Type" should be "a" not "t,