Questions and Answers : Place of Publication

Question asked on the Facebook Page of RDA Blog.

Mike Selby : In the 260 or 264 Field, do states and provinces need to be completely spelled out (California) or still abbreviated (CA)?

Answer: According to RDA Rule 2.8.2.3 for recording place of publication - Include both the local place name (city, town, etc.) and the name of the larger jurisdiction or jurisdictions (state, province, etc., and/or country) if present on the source of information.

EXCERPT FROM THE RDA BLOG POST 

Publication Data in a 260 Field : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

Myth:

“I can continue to record the publication data in a 260 field.”

Reality:

Incorrect.  The 260 has been replaced with the 264 field, for original cataloging using RDA.  Remember, also, to properly code the second indicator according to the function of the entity recorded in this field.

Myth:

“I am not required to transcribe the larger jurisdiction for the place of publication.”

Reality:

Wrong!  You are required to record this if it is present -- whether or not you think it is needed.

Myth:

“OK -- but I cannot add the larger jurisdiction if it is not present on the resource.”

Reality:

Again, wrong!  You are free to add -- in brackets -- the larger jurisdiction if you think it helpful.

Myth:

“Whenever you supply a place of publication, publisher, or date of publication in brackets, you must include a question mark.”

Reality:

No, the question mark simply means that you are relatively uncertain of your inference.  For example, if you are sure that the Museum of Modern Art is in New York, you don’t need a question mark; if you only ‘think’ it is the one in New York, you can add a question mark.

Production, publication, distribution. Manufacture, and copyright notice

MARC 21 FIELD TAG	MARC 21 SUBFIELD CODE	MARC 21 FIELD / SUBFIELD NAME	RDA INSTRUCTION NUMBER	RDA ELEMENT NAME
264		Production, publication, distribution. Manufacture, and copyright notice
264 2nd indicator 0	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.7.2	Place of production
264 2nd indicator 0	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.7.3	Parallel Place of Production
264 2nd indicator 0	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.7.4	Producer’s Name
264 2nd indicator 0	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.7.5	Parallel Producer's Name
264 2nd indicator 0	c	Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice	2.7.6	Date of Production
264 2nd indicator 1	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.8.2	Place of Publication
264 2nd indicator 1	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.8.3	Parallel Place of Publication
264 2nd indicator 1	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.8.4	Publisher’s Name
264 2nd indicator 1	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.8.5	Parallel Publisher's Name
264 2nd indicator 1	c	Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice	2.8.6	Date of Publication
264 2nd indicator 2	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.9.2	Place of Distribution
264 2nd indicator 2	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.9.3	Parallel Place of Distribution
264 2nd indicator 2	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.9.4	Distributor’s Name
264 2nd indicator 2	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.9.5	Parallel Distributor's Name
264 2nd indicator 2	c	Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice	2.9.6	Date of Distribution
264 2nd indicator 3	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.10.2	Place of Manufacture
264 2nd indicator 3	a	Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture	2.10.3	Parallel Place of Manufacture
264 2nd indicator 3	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.10.4	Manufacturer’s Name
264 2nd indicator 3	b	Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer	2.10.5	Parallel Manufacturer's Name
264 2nd indicator 3	c	Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice	2.10.6	Date of Manufacture
264 2nd indicator 4	c	Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice	2.11	Copyright Date

[Source: RDA Toolkit]

See also:

• RDA Blog Home
• About RDA - Resource Description and Access
• About RDA Blog
• RDA Resources
• Cataloger's Reference Directory
• RDA Blog Testimonials
• Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

International Standard Book Number (ISBN) - MARC to RDA Mapping

MARC 21 FIELD TAG	MARC 21 SUBFIELD CODE	MARC 21 FIELD / SUBFIELD NAME	RDA INSTRUCTION NUMBER	RDA ELEMENT NAME
020		International Standard Book Number
020	a	International Standard Book Number	2.15	Identifier for the Manifestation
020	c	Terms of availability	4.2	Terms of Availability
020	z	Cancelled/invalid ISBN	2.15	Identifier for the Manifestation

[Source : RDA Toolkit]

Date of Publication Not Identified in a Single-Part Resource

For Date of Publication Not Identified in a Single-Part Resource RDA Rule 2.8.6.6 says that If the date of publication is not identified in a single-part resource, supply the date or approximate date of publication.

EXAMPLE

[1998?]

If an approximate date of publication for a single-part resource cannot reasonably be determined, record date of publication not identified. Indicate that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself.

<<<<<<-------->>>>>>

LC-PCC PS for 2.8.6.6 DATE OF PUBLICATION NOT IDENTIFIED IN THE RESOURCE (very useful with many examples)

[Source: RDA Toolkit]

<<<<<<-------->>>>>>

008	130424q20072013ii

264	_1 |a Jayapura : |b Navajīvana Pablikeśana, |c [between 2007 and 2013?]

[Source: Library of Congress Catalog]

<<<<<<-------->>>>>>

q-Questionable date. A range of years is the only date that can be specified (e.g., between 1824 and 1840). Give the earliest year in Date 1 and latest in Date 2. DtSt: q Dates: 1966,1967 [1966 or 1967]  DtSt: q Dates: 1965,1969 [Between 1965 and 1969]  DtSt: q Dates: 18uu,19uu 260 Amsterdam : ‡b Elsevier, ‡c [19th century and early 20th century] [Decade is missing for both earliest and latest date.]  DtSt: q Dates: 1963,1966 260 New York : ‡b Hippocrene Books, ‡c [between 1963 and 1966] DtSt: q Dates: 1983,1984 260 Yerushalayim : ‡b E. Fisher, ‡c 744 [1983 or 1984]

[Source: RDA Toolkit and OCLC]

Inaccuracies

RDA Rule 1.7.9 is for "Inaccuracies". It instructs that When instructed to transcribe an element as it appears on the source, transcribe an inaccuracy or a misspelled word unless the instructions for a specific element indicate otherwise.

There are some exceptions to this rule, for example rule 2.3.1.4 of RDA.

It also instructs to make a note correcting the inaccuracy if considered important for identification or access (based on 2.17).

Also if the inaccuracy appears in a title and a corrected form of the title is considered important for identification or access, this RDA rule prescribes to record a corrected form of the title as a variant title.

[Source: Based on instructions from RDA Toolkit]

<<<<<---------->>>>>

See also:

• Transcription in Resource Description & Access (RDA) Cataloging
• Corrected Titles Proper & Variant Titles : RDA vs AACR2 : Questions and Answers & Best Practices
• Titles of Serials : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

<<<<<---------->>>>>

Question: In a book the name of the author is "inaccurately" printed on title page, and correct name is given on pages inside the book. How to transcribe it?

Answer: Based on guidelines mentioned above transcribe "as it is" found on the title page in the subfield "c" of MARC tag 245. Then make a "Note" of it in MARC21 500 tag.

From above description we get "... ... make a note correcting the inaccuracy if considered important for identification or access (based on 2.17)".

[2.17.3--Note on Statement of Responsibility>>2.17.3.4--Variant Forms of Names-->Make notes on variant forms of names if: the names of persons, families, or corporate bodies appear in the resource in forms that are different from those recorded in the statement of responsibility and the different forms are considered important for identification.]

See lccn: 2014348021 in Library of Congress Catalog in MARC21 view. Also check the established Name Authority Record for the name printed inaccurately on title page.

Please provide your comments on this interpretations of RDA Rules

[RDA Blog post revised with Question & Answer on 2015-07-28]

<<<<<---------->>>>>

See also:

• RDA Blog Home
• About RDA - Resource Description and Access
• About RDA Blog
• RDA Resources
• Cataloger's Reference Directory
• RDA Blog Testimonials
• Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Multiple ISBNs : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

Myth:

“When I record multiple ISBNs, those for manifestations other than the manifestation I have in hand are coded ‘z’.”

Reality:

Incorrect.  LC-PCC PS 2.15.1.7 calls for this coding if the manifestation would be represented by a different record.  For example, LC does not routinely create separate records for paperback and hardback versions, so both 020 fields can be coded as “a” (the one for the manifestation in hand should be recorded first).

[Source : Library of Congress]

<<<<<<<------------------>>>>>>>

A different approach .... (Pre-RDA OCLC policy on multiple ISBN)


(Source: OCLC message of the day through OCLC Connexion, viewed on December 29, 2011)

Multiple ISBN on a single bibliographic record

Multiple ISBNs are acceptable on a single bibliographic record. Hardcopy items may have additional ISBNs for the paperback, online, and CD-ROM versions printed on the item, just to list a few possibilities. Library of Congress Rule Interpretations 1.8, 1.8B2, and related rules would have the cataloger record all ISBNs that appear on the resource, with the ISBN for the item being cataloged as the first 020, if that applies.  Any parenthetical identifier for any of the ISBNs should be included; the LCRI says:  "Prefer qualifiers found on the bibliographic resource itself when they are judged to convey a condition intelligibly. Use judgment to deal with unusual, complex situations or unusual phenomena." MARC 21 further stipulates that "Only the ISBN applicable to the entity represented by a particular record is considered valid on that record,"which means that all of the other ISBNs should be coded in field 020 subfields $z. OCLC #687665134 is one example of a record with more than one ISBN.

Recording Statement of Responsibility : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

Myth:

“You must always record all statements of responsibility.”

Reality:

Incorrect.  You must record the first statement of responsibility, generally in full.  Recording subsequent statements of responsibility is a matter of judgment -- but of course they are usually helpful for the user.  Also, note this from 2.4.2.3: “If not all statements of responsibility appearing on the source or sources of information are being recorded, give preference to those identifying creators of the intellectual or artistic content. In case of doubt, record the first statement.”

Myth:

“But aren’t you required to record a subsequent statement of responsibility if it describes an illustrator of a resource intended for children?”

Reality:

This is good cataloging practice, but not necessarily required.  You must provide an access point for the illustrator; and that the relationship designator “$e illustrator”. But a statement of responsibility other than the first one is not a core element.

[Source : Library of Congress]

Recording Statement of Responsibility : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

Myth:

“You may not omit persons, families, or corporate bodies from a statement of responsibility.”

Reality:

Generally, this is true for monographs -- and it is the preferred practice, according to LC-PCC PS 2.4.1.5.  But in exceptional cases, if the statement names a burdensome number of entities, you may record the first and indicate the omission by summarizing what has been omitted, e.g. “[and eleven others].”

Myth:

“ ‘Burdensome’ is defined in RDA as ‘more than 3 entities or more than 12 parts of a table of contents.’ ”

Reality:

Wrong!  “Burdensome” is not defined in RDA or the LC-PCC PS.  Use cataloger judgment.

[Source : Library of Congress]

See also:

• RDA Blog Home
• About RDA - Resource Description and Access
• About RDA Blog
• RDA Resources
• Cataloger's Reference Directory
• RDA Blog Testimonials
• Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Recording Statement of Responsibility : LC-PCC Best Practices Guidelines

Myth:

“You must always record the statement of responsibility exactly as it appears, including all degrees, titles, and affiliations.”

Reality:

Generally, yes -- and this is the preferred practice for monographs.  But not necessarily.  LC-PCC PS 2.4.1.4 says to “generally” not abridge a statement of responsibility.  But if the statement of responsibility contains a burdensome amount of such information, you may abridge it, provided no essential information is lost.

[Source : Library of Congress]

See also:

• RDA Blog Home
• About RDA - Resource Description and Access
• About RDA Blog
• RDA Resources
• Cataloger's Reference Directory
• RDA Blog Testimonials
• Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):