Resource Description & Access (RDA)

MARC field 264 (formerly known as the publication, distribution, field in AACR2 ) is the home for many different RDA elements.   MARC field 264  will replace field 260 so that each of the different types can be coded explicitly. We will talk about the following areas: Production statement (2.7) Publication statement (2.8) Distribution statement (2.9) Manufacture statement (2.10) Copyright date (2.11) [Source: Library of Congress] Please note that relevant rules are available in  RDA RULES-CHAPTER 2 Some popular  RDA Blog posts on  PUBLICATION DISTRIBUTION ETC. ,  MARC-260 ,  MARC-264 , and  DATE  using guidelines from  RDA RULES-CHAPTER 2  are following: Date of Publication in RDA & MARC 21 Examples Name of Publisher in RDA & AACR2 & MARC 21 Examples Place of Publication in RDA & AACR2 & MARC 21 Examples RDA Rules Toolkit & LC-PCC PS Revision  (Contains description ...

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....

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  130424 q20072013 ii  264 _1 |a Jayapura : |b Navajīvana Pablikeśana, |c [ between 2007 and 2013? ] [Source: Library of Congress Catalog] <<<<<<-------->>>>>> q-Questionable date . ...

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.  Fo...