Mike, et al.,
Well
said and well put. With budgets for FY 2012 being written, discussed
(read:argued) there will be some public libraries, some not small, that
will not be able to afford the paper copy! I wish I were being an alarmist
about that comment; but alas, it is the way it is.
R.
-
Adam responded to Mike:
>> So far we at QBI are leaning toward utilizing Mac's cheat sheets.
>
>Which were put together based on drafts that might not represent the final
>published instructions.
Most of what is required to be RDA compliant for interfiling, is to
change the forms of entry for
Tribby
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 3:18 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "actual RDA"
I wrote:
So far we at QBI are leaning toward utilizing Mac's cheat sheets.
To which Adam Schiff replied:
"Which were put together based on drafts that might n
-8240
(203)432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edu
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Mike Tribby
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 3:18 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L
I wrote:
> So far we at QBI are leaning toward utilizing Mac's cheat sheets.
To which Adam Schiff replied:
"Which were put together based on drafts that might not represent the final
published instructions. I haven't compared them to see if they accurately
reflect the current RDA, but users of
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011, Mike Tribby wrote:
So far we at QBI are leaning toward utilizing Mac's cheat sheets.
Which were put together based on drafts that might not represent the final
published instructions. I haven't compared them to see if they accurately
reflect the current RDA, but users o
Of Fox, Chris
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 12:29 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "actual RDA"
And what about those of us who are still struggling with the requirement to
shell out scarce money for the Toolkit, or the print version for that matter,
whe
ccess / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Paul Burley
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 10:19 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "actual RDA"
Adam:
>>>"There is only one version of RDA that counts now, and that is
Talk about a digital divide!
And what do the yahoos (sarcasm) do who do not have access to a computer?
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Paul Burley wrote:
> Adam:
>
> >>>"There is only one version of RDA that counts now, and that is the one
> that is available through the RDA Toolkit, or, lac
Adam:
>>>"There is only one version of RDA that counts now, and that is the one
that is available through the RDA Toolkit, or, lacking that, the printed
loose-leaf version of RDA sold by ALA, CLA, CILIP, etc."
I disagree. Any given standard can only have a _single_ authoritative
source. If there'
10 matches
Mail list logo
