Q: What is Dublin Core?
A: It is a metadata encoding standard used for digital collections developed in Dublin, Ohio, which consists of fifteen metadata elements. To learn more about Dublin Core, go to “http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/”.
Q: What is Dublin Core?
A: It is a metadata encoding standard used for digital collections developed in Dublin, Ohio, which consists of fifteen metadata elements. To learn more about Dublin Core, go to “http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/”.
Posted in Dublin Core | Leave a Comment »
Q: What are the 336, 337, and 338 fields in RDA?
A: There are three new MARC fields associated with RDA: 336, 337, and 338. These fields are replacing GMDs (General Material Designation), but this is new for books. They indicate the type of material; for example, you are more familiar with GMD in records for electronic resources–you will always see this indicated next to the title in square brackets (e.g., |h [electronic resources]). RDA is replacing this in the 245 and adding this information in these three fields. Also, the 336, 337, and 338 will change depending on the format of the work. For books, we have textual material. So we can now indicate this in the record. To be consistent, this information will now be added to book records.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Can centimeters be spelled out?
A: There is no change with cm since the symbol is internationally known. RDA makes a distinction between abbreviations and symbols. That is, ed. (editor with a period at the end) is an abbreviation whereas cm (without the period at the end) is a symbol.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: How will this affect our OPACs, if any?
A: Some examples. The abbreviations we are talking about that are no longer necessary are found in area 4 (spell out the larger jurisdiction) and area 5 (spell out pages and illustrations). Our users will have a better idea of what we are trying to say in our records. They do not understand the latin s.l. (sine loco) and s.n. (sine nomine), but when we can state “no place of publication” and “no publisher name” instead, this is much clearer. Moreover, the other big change for no more abbreviations is with area 2. We can now spell out the edition statement as we see it on the source.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Can I opt to abbreviate instead of spelling out the entire word?
A: RDA is trying to do away with abbreviations, so if you want to follow RDA, you should not use the abbreviations, because most library users don’t understand what the abbreviations mean.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Do you ever still abbreviate words in RDA?
A: The abbreviations are kept if abbreviated on the source. An example of abbreviation is,
|e illustrator (RDA) versus |e ill. (AACR2).
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Do you include |c author name in the 245?
A: Nothing changes in the 245. You still transcribe title and statement of responsibility exactly as found on the source. With access points, you now step back and look at the 245 |c to make some determinations for main and added entry. In AACR2, there are only 4 designation of function codes; in RDA, there are many more. Further, in AACR2 you have to use the abbreviation; in RDA you can spell out the entire word.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: What does the |e relationship designator in the 100 field of RDA mean?
A: Subfield |e is for designation of function in AACR2; in RDA it is called a relationship designator. You can now add these functions to the 100 tag where they were never allowed before. So you can have the following:
100 1_ Smith, John, |e author.
In AACR2, designation of function was only allowed in the 700 tags. RDA is expanding on this use in the record, so you can continue to add a |e to the 700 tag, but now you have more options.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Are the fixed fields projected to change in RDA?
A: I have not seen anything about the fixed fields changing in RDA; however, the entire MARC format is under review and will eventually be replaced.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Will the fixed fields (which I think that’s what the fields at the top of the record are called) change for RDA?
A: This was the common practice for decades. The fixed fields have not changed yet.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Are all other authors listed seperately in the 700 field, excluding the 100 field?
A: Right. You never repeat the 100 in the 700 and vice versa. You can only have one 100 tag per record.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: With a record with 4 authors, does the first author’s name go in the 100 field?
A: Yes, this is part of RDA no more rule of three. You now have the option to list all and add first as Main entry and remaining as added entries.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Is it okay to use the same LCSH, but with different subdivisions? Would this be too repetitive?
A: No, that is fine. If you are trying to bring out certain aspects of the subject, you have to repeat main LCSH. For example, it is better to repeat the LCSH than to add on the |x to the same LCSH.
Posted in LCSH, Subdivisions | Leave a Comment »
Q: If we need a 600 tag, do we use exact copy of 100 tag, including indicators?
A: Yes, and it follows the same format for a name heading.
Posted in AACR2 Area 1 Statement of Responsibility, Access Points, Main and Added Entry | Leave a Comment »
Q: Does the DDC have to connect exactly with the LCSH?
A: Yes, it should and you can actually get pretty close with this if you do a good job with subject analysis.
Posted in DDC, LCSH | Leave a Comment »
Q: If we use a |v field in the LCSH that we come up with, should it be added to all the subject headings in our record?
A: Yes, it should be applied because it will be true of all LCSH. However, you have to read the scope note for the use of that Form Subdivision in the record with the main LCSH. If you have a topical LCSH and the note reads use with all topical LCSH, then you are okay. But if it is limited in use, then you have to consider if it applies to your main LCSH.
Posted in Form Subdivision, LCSH, Scope Note, Subdivisions | Leave a Comment »
Q: How do you create a cutter if there is no main author?
A: The Cutter is based on main entry. Main entry can also be the title if there is no 100 tag in the record. So you Cutter for the first significant word of the title, i.e., do not Cutter for the initial article.
Posted in AACR2 Area 1 Statement of Responsibility, AACR2 Area 1 Title, Main and Added Entry | Leave a Comment »
Q: A 246 tag should only be considered for the title proper and not subtitles, correct? Would a subtitle variation best be suited for a 500 note?
A: Correct, only the title proper. No need to add a note for a subtitle variation.
Posted in AACR2 Area 7 Notes, Access Points | Leave a Comment »
Q: If an edition is listed on the front cover, is this something that would be included in a note?
A: No, just in the edition tag. The sources of information for edition statement include all preliminary pages. The edition on the front cover can be used only if the front cover is the only place you see the edition statement.
Posted in AACR2 Area 2 Edition | Leave a Comment »
Q: How do you handles dashes within chapter titles when dashes are what separates the chapters titles in the notes field?
A: If there are dashes in the TOC title itself, replace with a comma. Make sure these are the same title.
Posted in AACR2 Area 7 Notes | Leave a Comment »
Q: Is the first indicator of a series always 0?
A: The 490 tag first indicator is zero if you do not add an 830 tag. If you add the 830 tag, you must change the first indicator to a 1.
Posted in AACR2 Area 6 Series, Main and Added Entry | Leave a Comment »
Q: Can a book have more than one 490 field? I’m seeing a couple of different potential series names for one of the titles.
A: Yes, they can. But be careful with multiple series names and research to make sure they are actually series.
Posted in AACR2 Area 6 Series, Access Points | Leave a Comment »
Q: If a book has both an ISBN number and an ISBN number by which to order the book, should we include both?
A: One of these ISBN might be for the International edition. If you have both on the source and you can qualify them, you must include two 020 tags in your records. The qualification of the binding here is important – you should look at whether the ISBN is followed by paperback or acid free paper for this binding.
Posted in AACR2 Area 8 ISBN, Access Points | Leave a Comment »
Q: Regarding 504 notes… RDA rule 7.16.1 shows the following as examples: “Includes index” and “Bibliography: pages 859–910.” Is either acceptable? Does one apply to indexes only and the other to bib only?
A: You can still combine these notes. These are just examples of the individual notes.
Posted in AACR2 Area 7 Notes, RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: Is designation of function used in RDA only or does it apply to AACR2?
A: Designation of function is found in both. It has more limited use in AACR2. Used only for 700 tags, there are only 4 possibilities. RDA will make better use of this function.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: I’m a little unclear on series added entries. What is the difference between a series being “traced” and one that is “untraced”?
A: Traced simply means we are providing an access point for a heading, such as the 700 tag. For untraced series, there will be no 700 tag.
Posted in AACR2 Area 6 Series, Access Points, RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: In the 300 tag, is there a specific RDA wording for color illustrations?
A: Yes, you can find something in RDA on color illustrations. One way that I find things is to use the keyword search option. Just type in “color”.
Posted in AACR2 Area 5 Physical Description, RDA, Variable Fields | Leave a Comment »
Q: I know we don’t use abbreviations, but cm is retained, right, because it’s a symbol? Is it followed by a period or not?
A: Yes, retain cm. It is one of the few and because it is recognized internationally. The period after the cm is debated. It is part of the punctuation of MARC and ISBD, so I would leave it.
Posted in ISBD, MARC | Leave a Comment »
Q: In a 504 tag, when you are putting the page numbers for the bibliographic records, do you also not abbreviate p. (for pages) there? For the 336, 337, 338 tags do we put the |a or is that assumed like the others?
A: Right, all abbreviations are pretty much done away with unless they are found on the source as such. |a is always assumed. Delete it from your records.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: If a title has 4 authors, are all are listed in 700, with nothing in 100?
A: You will have to review the rules for this. This is where one of the big changes has been made but rules for main entry still apply here. In thinking about main entry with multiple authors listed, main entry goes to the first listed.
Posted in AACR2 Area 1 Statement of Responsibility, RDA | Leave a Comment »
Q: I don’t understand what the 338 tag is. Will we use this tag for our titles?
A: Yes, these new tags are mandatory for RDA records. You need to add the 336, 337, and 338.
Posted in RDA | Leave a Comment »