Saturday, August 3, 2013

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.

Myth:
“I can abridge the name of the publisher if it is lengthy.”

Reality:
Incorrect.  You must record the publisher’s name exactly and as fully as it appears (LC-PCC PS 2.8.1.4 uses the word ‘generally’, which means that -- in the case of corporate hierarchy -- rare exceptions are allowed).

Myth:
“I must always record every publisher, distributor, and manufacturer on the resource.”
Reality:
Wrong.  Only the first publisher statement is core.


Myth:
“If I decide to record two publishers, I should do so in separate 264 fields.”

Reality:
Incorrect.  The purpose of repeatable 264 fields is to record different functions (i.e., publisher, distributor, manufacturer, date of copyright), or to reflect changes over time (using the 264 first indicator).  If you wish to record a co-publisher, record both publishers and their places (if the places are different) in a single 264 field, as you did under AACR2.

Myth:
“I cannot record a copyright date if there is a ‘good’ publication date.”
Reality:
Incorrect!  Although you often use a copyright date to infer a publication data, you certainly may also record the copyright date in a separate 264 #4 field if you wish (with only a $c).  If you do so, remember to correctly code the 008 field (Type of Date “t”; Date 1; Date 2).



[Source : Library of Congress]