ality.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: Friday, January 11, 2013 4:16 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
It is not in
ccess
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Monica Boyer
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 3:00 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
A slight tangent from the conversation:
In the interest of trying to learn about the 264 in RDA,
It is not in RDA Toolkit. But it is covered in PCC guideline. I remember
that OCLC Technical Bulletin also mentioned it.
www.loc.gov/aba/*pcc*/documents/*264*-*Guidelines*.doc
Joan Wang
Illinois Heartland Library System
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:59 PM, Monica Boyer wrote:
> A slight tangent fr
d Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 12:55
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
RDA
2.11<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp2&target=rda2-7597#rda2-7597&
A slight tangent from the conversation:
In the interest of trying to learn about the 264 in RDA, I looked at the
MARC Bibliographic to RDA Mapping in the RDA Toolkit, & the 264 isn't
there. Likewise, & perhaps more surprisingly, the 264 also isn't in the
RDA to MARC Bibliographic Mapping.
Please
Transcription of copyright date is a core element (Mandatory) if neither
the date of publication nor the date of distribution is identified. This
is why the LC-PCC Policy Statement tells catalogers to supply a probable
publication date as much as possible, rather than recording "date of
public
1:48 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
I’d say you never in fact need to use the “nuclear option” “date of publication
not identified” because you at least know that by the time a published resource
hits your desk it has been published
and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Arakawa, Steven
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 10:49 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
During the test period, LC defined the copyright date as core, but the
copyright date was “de-co
Ian Fairclough asked:
If the date of publication that you put in a 264 field with second
>indicator 1 is taken from a printed copyright date, as often is found
>on the title page verso, do you put that date in brackets?
Yes, but without the "c", and in our case, no questions mark. We will
only
-Original Message-
From: mco...@library.wisc.edu [mailto:mco...@library.wisc.edu]
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:28 AM
To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
Cc: Deborah Fritz
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
If you use the co
A-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jack Wu
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 11:10 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
Thanks for the quotes from LC-PCC PS for 1.7.1 whether to place a period at the
end in a 264 field:
[DF:]
I do not know if LC PCC PS is interpreted correctly.
However,
RDA 2.8.6.6 says "If the date of publication is not identified in a
resource... record the copyright date, and RDA 2.11 says "copyright date
is a core element if...neither the date of publication ... is
identified.
I tend to think in
If you use the copyright date to supply the date in 264_1, and adding
the copyright date is optional, are there any circumstances under which
transcription of the copyright date is mandatory?
On 1/11/2013 9:49 AM, Deborah Fritz wrote:
*From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Descripti
Thanks for the quotes from LC-PCC PS for 1.7.1 whether to place a period
at the end in a 264 field:
[DF:] LC-PCC PS for 1.7.1 (
http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=lcpschp1&target=lcps1-471#lcps1-471
) says “Field 264 usually ends with a period, a closing parenthesis, a
closing bracket
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Arakawa, Steven
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 10:39 AM
[SA]
[DF:] Yes, if you use the copyright date to supply the date in 264_1, then
adding the copyright date is optio
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 9:15 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] question about dates in 264 fields
From: Resource Description and
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 9:05 AM
If the date of publication that you put in a 264 field with second indicator
1 is taken from a printed copyright date,
Dear RDA-L readers,
If the date of publication that you put in a 264 field with second indicator 1
is taken from a printed copyright date, as often is found on the title page
verso, do you put that date in brackets?
Also, do you put a period at the end of that field?
And, do you put a period
18 matches
Mail list logo
