Resource Description & Access (RDA)

Date of Publication, Distribution, and Copyright in Resource Description and Access (RDA) Cataloging Rules  & MARC 264 Examples Table of Contents: Core Element How Date of Publication is defined Where the Rules are for Date of Publication in RDA What are the Sources of Information for Date of Publication in RDA How is Date of Publication Transcribed / Recorded in Resource Description and Access (RDA) Dates of the Non-Gregorian or Julian Calendar; Dates in the Form of Chronogram RDA Examples What to do if the date on the resource is incorrect Multipart Monographs, Serials, and Integrating Resources Date of Publication not Identified in a Single-Part Resource RDA Cataloging Examples of Dates Supplying Dates (Date of Publication Not Identified in the Resource) Importance of Supplying Probable Place and Date of Publication Examples of Supplying Publication Data Other RDA Examples of Dates Date of Distribution Where the Rules are for Date of Distribution in ...

RDA Toolkit Update, April 14, 2015  A new release of the RDA Toolkit is published on Tuesday, April 14. This message will cover several points you should be aware of related to the release.  TOPIC 1: Changes in RDA Content TOPIC 2: Change in Content in LC-PCC PSs TOPIC 3: Functional Changes in the RDA Toolkit TOPIC 1: Changes in RDA Content There are two types of changes in the RDA content for this update: 1) the fourth annual major update to RDA based on the decisions made by the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC) at their November 2014 meeting; and 2) “Fast Track” changes that are relatively minor and typical of a release update. Revisions from JSC actions: The changes to individual instructions are identifiable by the “revision history” icon in the RDA Toolkit (a dark blue rectangular icon with the date "2015/04").  A complete listing of all changes due to the proposal process will appear in the left-side table of contents...

Following  RDA Blog  posts are revised: Use of 500 and 510 Field to Show Relationships in a Corporate Body Name  [Revised on 2015-04-13] Editor of Compilation vs Compiler  [Revised on 2015-03-31] Conventional Collective title / Uniform title : Questions and Answers  [Revised on 2015-04-03] See also: RDA Blog Testimonials & Reviews  

A revised version of this article is available at:  https://www.librarianshipstudies.com/2020/07/pseudonyms-rda-cataloging-rules-marc-21-examples-name-authority-records.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OLD VERSION Definition Pseudonym A name used by a person (either alone or in collaboration with others) that is not the person’s real name. ( RDA Toolkit Glossary) Pseudonym A name assumed by an author to conceal or obscure his or her identity. ( AACR2 Glossary)  Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on Library of Congress / Program for Cooperative Cataloging practice for creating Name Authority Records (NARs) for persons who use Pseudonyms: Q1. How many Name Authority Records ( NARs ) are needed for contemporary persons who use pseudonyms?  Answer: If the person never uses his real name in his works but only use his pseudonym as his name, then establish the Name Authority Record under t...

QUESTION: What code in FFD 008/06 (r or t) and 2 nd  date in 008/11-14 should be given when we are getting both 1 st  and 2 nd  reprint dates and copyright date as well in the publication?  ANSWER:  In answer to your FFD 008/06 (r or t) question:  code r takes precedence over code t.   MARC 21 (008/07-11)--Precedence of codes (monographic items): when more than one code applies to bibliographic item, use the table provided.  According to this table r Reprint/original date takes precedence over t (copyright date). 005 20130921045548.0 008 130719 r20112006 ii b 001 0 eng 010 __ |a 2013319376 020 __ |a 9788179931875 025 __ |a I-E-2013-319376; 49-90 037 __ |b Library of Congress -- New Delhi Overseas Office 040 __ |a DLC |b eng |e rda |c DLC |d DLC 042 __ |a lcode 100 1_ |a Ramachandra, T. V. 245 10 |a Management of municipal solid waste / |c T.V. Ramachandra. 264 _1 |a New Delhi : ...

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 Prac...

Myth: “In the case of compilations of independent works, I must always record an analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work, according to LC-PCC PS 25.1.” Reality: Not necessarily.  Related Work is “LC core” for compilations, but there are exceptions.  Be sure you understand when to include a Contents Note (505) and Analytical Access Point (7XX X2). <<<<<---------->>>>> Whole-part relationships for Compilations LC: Give MARC 505 contents note unless contents indicated in another part of the of the description (e.g., in MARC 245 $a because no collective title present) or unless burdensome              •i.e., There is no limit on the number of works in the contents note unless burdensome.  LC: Give one MARC 7XX analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work when it represents a substantial part of the resource; cataloger judgment if...

LC-PCC PS for 1.7.1  (RDA) GENERAL GUIDELINES ON TRANSCRIPTION   (Below is the Table of Contents; for complete text of this LC-PCC PS, click above) Introduction  LC practice/PCC practice: This Policy Statement is an overall statement related to punctuation/spacing conventions. For convenience, it addresses in one place conventions applicable to access points in bibliographic and name authority records and those applicable to other parts of the bibliographic record. Much of the data in a MARC record are explicitly identified by content designation (tags, indicators, subfield codes). Upon output or display, the content designation is used to determine various display conventions including spacing. Internally there is often no spacing at all but instead content designation, particularly subfield codes. In displays that do not show content designation, spacing is substituted. How much spacing is at the discretion of a particular system. However, ...