250 - Edition Statement (R) - MARC 21 Bibliographic - Full

• Library of Congress >> MARC >> Bibliographic >> 25X-28X >> 250 [LC]
• 250  Edition Statement (R) [OCLC]

250  Edition Statement (R)

Input Standards
Required if applicable/Required if applicable
1st Indicator  Undefined
	Undefined
2nd Indicator  Undefined
	Undefined
Subfields (R=Repeatable  NR=Nonrepeatable)		Input Standards
‡a	Edition statement (R)	Mandatory/Mandatory
‡b	Remainder of edition statement (NR)	Required if applicable/Required if applicable
‡3	Materials specified (NR)	Optional/Optional

---

Definition

An edition statement is a word or phrase appearing in the resource that normally indicates a difference in either content or form between the resource and a related resource. An edition statement can often be identified by the use of words such as edition, issue, level, state, update, and version, or their equivalents in other languages. Numbers and/or statements of responsibility may also appear with an edition statement. Under RDA, the edition statement is a transcribed element and no abbreviations are used unless they appear in the source used for the edition statement. 250 Edition 1965-1966. 250 First edition, new corrected printing. 250 Third impression (with minor revisions). 250 Canadian edition. 250 [Kindle edition]. 250 Level I, version 1.00. 250 6th issue, 2nd printing. 250 Update 3/1/83. 250 [1st issue, unexpurgated]. 250 [2nd state with chandelier burnished from plate and figures of serving-boy, etc.]. 250 3rd draft, December 2014. 250 Teacher's edition. 250 Authorized French language edition. 250 Interactive version. 250 Medium voice range. A statement of revision, including the word revised (or its equivalent in other languages) alone, with modifications, or as a modifier, is an edition statement. 250 [Revised and up-to-date]. 250 Revised edition. 250 Revised. 250 Revised second edition. 250 [Slightly revised]. 250 Neu revidiert. An edition statement may include a personal, corporate, or family name as a statement of responsibility. 250 Second edition / ‡b revised by M.C.F. Proctor. 250 New and enlarged edition / ‡b by members of the staff of the Gardeners' Chronicle. A phrase that includes only the word revised and a personal name, however, is not an edition statement. The following italicized phrases are statements of responsibility (use field 245 subfield ‡c), not edition statements. 245 1 0 Aristotle's ethics : ‡b writings from the complete works / ‡c revised, edited, and with an introduction by Jonathan Barnes and Anthony Kenny. 245 0 0 Sunspot numbers, 1610-1985 : ‡b based on "The sunspot activity in the years 1610-1960" / ‡c revised by John A. McKinnon. A statement such as abridged or unabridged (or their equivalents in other languages) alone, with modifications, or as a modifier, is an edition statement. 250 Abridged. 250 Unabridged. 250 Abridged edition. 250 Complete and unabridged edition. A statement indicating the pre-publication state of a resource (proofs, galleys, advance copies, etc.) is an edition statement. 250 Uncorrected page proof. 250 Advance reader's copy. 250 [Uncorrected galley]. 250 Prepublication copy. 250 [Advance uncorrected proofs]. An edition statement may include information about new material. 250 2nd ed. / ‡b edited with an introduction and notes by H.A. Rose, new impression.

[Source: OCLC]

Single Volume with Numbered Pages, Leaves, or Columns : Questions and Answers

Question: How to give page numbers when they are numbered in words for resource consisting of single unit.

Answer: According to RDA Rule 3.4.5.2 - Record pages, etc., that are numbered in words by giving the numeric equivalent.

300 $a 58 pages

Note: in the above example of a book - pages are numbered in words.

Adding Date to Conventional Collective Titles : Questions and Answers

Question: According to slide 8 of http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/source/special_topics_compilations.ppt we are to add the date to conventional collective titles beginning with "Works". Please verify if this is now optional or required.

Answer:  The PPT  take a look at it now. http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/Refresher_training_dec_2011.html

Question: Great! Slide 8 is now revised. However, slide 9 still gives an example of the old practice.

Answer (Ana Lupe Cristán, Library of Congress): Yes, the point is you DON’T HAVE to add it but you can if you want too.  It used to be mandatory now it is optional, plus you'll see a lot of them still in the LC/NAF and we do not expect catalogers to remove the dates.   

Revised Slides as Discussed Above

Compilations of one creator: Things to remember

• If your resource is a compilation by a single creator, determine if that compilation has become known over time by a title and use that title, otherwise use a conventional collective title
• Not necessary to know if a creator created works only in a single form.
• Do not use “Selections” in subfield $a of the 240.
• Current LC practice is NOT to add routinely add a date to any collective conventional title that begins with Works.

Notes: Let’s recap and say it in a different way - If your resource is a compilation by a single creator, determine if that compilation has become known over time by a title; this situation does not occur often but you’ll know it when it does.

No longer will a cataloger need to determine what AACR2 requires: knowing if the creator created works only in a single form. No longer will LC catalogers apply different policies if the title proper of the compilation is a “distinctive title.”

Under AACR2 and when we first implemented RDA, we added a date in subfield $f following “Works” or “Works. Selections” in a 240. Our current practice is not to add the date, thus we reuse the same authorized access point for a compilation of the complete works of an author published in 2012 and one published in 2013.

Compilations – one creator

• Remember that a corporate body can be a creator also so long as the contents meet the criteria at: RDA 19.2.1.1.1

 [Source: Library of Congress]

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

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

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.

264 - Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture, and Copyright Notice (R)

First Indicator	Second Indicator
Sequence of statements # - Not applicable/No information provided/Earliest 2 - Intervening 3 - Current/Latest	Function of entity 0 - Production 1 - Publication 2 - Distribution 3 - Manufacture 4 - Copyright notice date

---

Subfield Codes
$a - Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture (R) $b - Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer (R) $c - Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice (R)	$3 - Materials specified (NR) $6 - Linkage (NR) $8 - Field link and sequence number (R)

---

FIELD DEFINITION AND SCOPE

Statement relating to the publication, printing, distribution, issue, release, or production of a work.

Information in field 264 is similar to information in field 260 (Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint)). Field 264 is useful for cases where the content standard or institutional policies make a distinction between functions

---

Subfields

 

‡a Place of production, publication, distribution, manufacture

Place of production, publication, distribution, or manufacture, transcribed as it appears on the source of information.

264 1 Boston : ‡b [publisher not identified], ‡c 2010.

264 3 Cambridge : ‡b Kinsey Printing Company

[On source: Published in Boston, 2010; Cambridge -- Kinsey Printing Company; no distribution information]

264 1 Rankin, Pennsylvania : ‡b St. Mary's Church, ‡c 1928.

264 1 Warrendale, PA, U.S.A. : ‡b SAE International, ‡c [1994]

264 1 [Place of publication not identified] : ‡b [publisher not identified], ‡c 2009.

264 2 Kuala Lumpur : ‡b Pengedar, Metro Book Distributor

264 3 [Place of manufacture not identified] : ‡b BRC Printing & Desktop Publishing Ltd.

264 1 Cham ; ‡a Heidelberg ; ‡a New York ; ‡a Dordrecht ; ‡a London : ‡b Springer, ‡c [2014]

‡b Name of producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer.

Name of producer, publisher, distributor, or manufacturer, transcribed as it appears on the source of information.

264 1 [Place of publication not identified] : ‡b ABC Publishers, ‡c 2009.

264 2 Seattle : ‡b Iverson Company

[On source: ABC Publishers, 2009; distributed by Iverson Company, Seattle]

264 1 New York, New York : ‡b Dell Publishing Co., Inc., ‡c [1972]

264 1 New York, N.Y. : ‡b New York Labor News Company, ‡c [1961]

264 1 [Chicago?] : ‡b Chicago and North Western Line, ‡c [1940?]

264 1 New York : ‡b Basic Books, a member of the Perseus Books Group, ‡c [2014]

264 1 Munchen, Germany : ‡b C.H. Beck ; ‡a Oxford, United Kingdom : ‡b Hart ; ‡a Baden-Baden, Germany : ‡b Nomos ; ‡a Basel, Switzerland : ‡b Helbing Lichtenhahn, ‡c 2014.

264 2 [Place of distribution not identified] : ‡b Distributed by Hal Leonard

264 3 Hong Kong : ‡b [manufacturer not identified], ‡c [1995]

‡c Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice

Date of production, publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright notice. Precede a copyright date by the copyright symbol ( © ) or the phonogram copyright symbol ( ℗ ).

264 1 New York : ‡b Printed by order of the Board of Trustees, ‡c 1875.

264 1 Washington, D.C. : ‡b International Republican Institute, ‡c [date of publication not identified]

264 1 New York : ‡b Carlton and Lanahan, ‡c [between 1868 and 1872]

264 2 Waverly, IA : ‡b Distributed by CQ Products, ‡c [2010]

264 4 ‡c ©2002

264 4 ‡c ℗1983

‡3 Materials specified

Information to differentiate the multiple statements of the described materials to which the field applies.

264 1 ‡3 <1976-> : ‡a New York, NY : ‡b Alan R. Liss, Inc.

264 3 1 ‡3 <2005-> : ‡a Hoboken, N.J. : ‡b Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Library of Congress >> MARC >> Bibliographic >> 25X-28X >> 264
OCLC - MARC 264