Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Mac said: It does not matter to me, or patrons I suspect, whether one uses $c[19]61. $c[1961] or $c1961. It *is* important that the whole year be there, since one should not have to wait for a note to know whether it is 1761, 1861, or 1961. A little pragmatism is in order here! To transcr

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Heidrun said: >My reasoning goes as follows: You do not have to supply the date, >because in fact you know the year. The only problem is that it is >written on the source of information in some kind of shorthand. It does not matter to me, or patrons I suspect, whether one uses $c[19]61. $c[196

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal, I would give "1961", without using any square brackets. My reasoning goes as follows: You do not have to supply the date, because in fact you know the year. The only problem is that it is written on the source of information in some kind of shorthand. But when you think about i

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal said: >The problem is that we are send from 2.7.6 to 1.8, and then, from 1.8 >to 1.7. So the same rules seem to apply to all « transcribed » >elements (title, statement of responsibility, edition, production >statement, etc ...). Unlike title, RDA does allow the providing in brack

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

ss [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Deborah Fritz Envoyé : 8 août 2013 14:56 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Since RDA does not address this situation specifically, you must apply the RDA principles to your decision. Under

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

nd Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 2:15 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Hi! Yes, I am dealing with the original intaglio. Marie-Chantal L&#x

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

truire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Joan Wang Envoyé : 8 août 2013 14:44 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

According to RDA 1.4, date of production, as well as date of publication, is a transcribed element. But if the date as it appears in the resource is not of the Gregorian or Julian calendar, we are allowed to supply the corresponding date or dates of the Gregorian or Julian calendar. Thanks, Joan W

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

The date of production is not a transcribed element. 2.7.6.3 says to "record the date of production" and then refers to 2.7.1. In 2.7.1.4 it says "Transcribe places of production and producers' names as they appear on the source of information" but "Record dates of production as they appear on

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Hi again! The problem is that we are send from 2.7.6 to 1.8, and then, from 1.8 to 1.7. So the same rules seem to apply to all « transcribed » elements (title, statement of responsibility, edition, production statement, etc ...). If characters are missing in a title, I must write up a note; the

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

13 13:26 À : =?iso-8859-1?Q?L=27=C9cuyer-Coelho_Marie-Chantal?=@kepler.riq.qc.ca; L'Écuyer-Coelho Marie-Chantal Cc : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form Marie-Chantal posted: >I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote 61 ... 264 0

Re: [RDA-L] Date given in an incomplete form

Marie-Chantal posted: >I am presently describing an etching. The artist simply wrote 61 ... 264 0 $a]Place, Jurisdiction] :$bArtist's Name,$c[19]61. This assumes the artist's name appears on the etching. If it is a reproduction as apposed to the original etching, the 264 2nd indicator would