Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Alternatives Options and Exceptions in RDA : What Every Cataloger Needs to Know

RDA Alternatives Options Exceptions

Contents:
  • Alternatives Options and Exceptions in RDA : What Every Cataloger Needs to Know
  • What are RDA Alternatives?
  • Example of RDA Alternatives
  • What are RDA Options?
  • Example of RDA Optional Additions
  • Example of RDA Optional Omissions
  • What are RDA Exceptions? 
  • Example of RDA Exceptions
  • How to decide whether to apply the alternatives, options, or exceptions?
  • Note on the use of screen images from RDA Toolkit (Following RDA and RDA Toolkit Copyright Statement and guidelines)

Alternatives Options and Exceptions in RDA : What Every Cataloger Needs to Know
RDA contains a number of guidelines and instructions that are marked as alternatives, options (optional additions, optional omissions), and exceptions. Each of these is clearly identified by an italicized label, which in the RDA Toolkit appears in green color in the instruction (alternative, optional addition, optional omission, exception). A green vertical bar also appears in the left margin next of an alternative, optional, or exceptional instruction in RDA Toolkit. These allow individual libraries or cataloging agencies to make decisions based on individual considerations in cases where two or more provisions are equally valid. Guidelines for alternatives and options are provided in RDA rule 0.8, and instructions for applying exceptions is at RDA 0.9 of chapter 0. 

What are RDA Alternatives?
Glossary of Library & Information Science defines Alternatives in RDA as below:
RDA Alternatives  In Resource Description and Access (RDA) cataloging rules there are a number of guidelines and instructions that are labeled as alternativesAlternative guidelines and instructions  in Resource Description and Access (RDA) provide an alternative approach to what is specified in the immediately preceding guideline or instruction. A cataloger can choose to follow the rule or the alternative.

Example of RDA Alternatives: at RDA 2.3.2.9: Resource Lacking a Collective Title, the general instruction states: “If: the type of description chosen for the resource is a comprehensive description and the resource lacks a collective title then: record the titles proper of the parts as they appear on the source of information for the resource as a whole … …” Immediately after the examples, an alternative is given as: “Devise a collective title by applying the instructions … If considered important for identification or access, record the titles of individual parts as the titles proper of related manifestations …” If you observe the screen image of RDA Toolkit, just after the label Alternative there are icons that link to various policy statements. If you go to the LC-PCC PS for this alternative, it says: “LC practice/PCC practice for Alternative: Generally, do not apply.” So according to LC-PCC PS on the alternative instruction the cataloger should not devise a collective title in this case.

RDA ALTERNATIVES
"Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)".
What are RDA Options?
Glossary of Library & Information Science defines Options in RDA as below:
RDA Options  In Resource Description and Access (RDA) cataloging rules there are a number of guidelines and instructions that are labeled as optionsOptions appear in two forms in RDA, viz. optional additions and optional omissions. The optional addition of data that supplement what is called for in the immediately preceding instruction, or the optional omission of specific data called for in the immediately preceding instruction. Hence, it can be said that optional instruction offers the opportunity to either supplement required data with additional information (metadata), or omit data from what is instructed in the preceding rules. Here it is important to note that each library or cataloging agency can decide when or whether to follow the options or just follow the rules in the immediately preceding instruction. They may choose to establish their own policies and guidelines on the application of the options or leave decisions on the use of options to the cataloger’s judgment. 

Example of RDA Optional Additions: RDA rule 2.8.6.3 is for Recording Date of Publication. Here an optional addition instruction appears after the examples which says “If the date as it appears in the resource is not of the Gregorian or Julian calendar, add the corresponding date or dates of the Gregorian or Julian calendar. Indicate that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself.” Just after the label Optional Addition, there are icons that links to various policy statements. If you go to the LC-PCC PS for this alternative, it says: “LC practice/PCC practice for Optional addition: Add the corresponding date or dates of the Gregorian or Julian calendar. If dates have been recorded using the Hebrew script, the Gregorian or Julian calendar date may be added in both the non-Latin and romanized field, or only the romanized field.” (Click on the image to enlarge)

RDA OPTIONAL ADDITION
"Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)".
Example of RDA Optional Omissions: RDA rule 2.4.1.5 is for Statement Naming More Than One Person, etc. Here an optional addition instruction appears after the examples which says “If a single statement of responsibility names more than three persons, families, or corporate bodies performing the same function (or with the same degree of responsibility), omit any but the first of each group of such persons, families, or bodies... If you observe the screen image of RDA Toolkit, just after the label Optional Omission there are icons that link to various policy statements. If you go to the LC-PCC PS for this alternative, it says: “LC practice/PCC practice for Optional omission: Generally, do not omit names in a statement of responsibility.” (Click on the image to enlarge)


"Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)". 


What are RDA Exceptions? 
Glossary of Library & Information Science defines Exceptions in RDA as below:
RDA Exceptions  In Resource Description and Access (RDA) cataloging rules there are a number of guidelines and instructions that are labeled as exceptions. Some instructions are scoped as being applicable only to certain types of resources (such as serials). An exception is an instruction that takes precedence over the immediately preceding instruction and applies to a specific type of resource, condition, etc. Here in RDA Toolkit, a LC-PCC PS appears which suggests the LC practice is to apply the guidelines in Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Materials (Books) (DCRM(B)) for books published before 1801 and selected early 19th century resources instead of RDA rules. Unlike alternatives and optionsexceptions are not subordinate to general instructions, therefore, RDA exceptions generally do not require policy statements, although some exceptional situations may require some additional considerations. Exceptions must be followed when applicable. They are provided when it is necessary to depart from a rule’s instructions because of a specific type of resource or situation.

Example of RDA Exceptions: RDA rule 2.3.2.5 is for Title in More Than One Form. After the instructions and example, an exception to this rules appears as for Serials and integrating resources, which suggests “If the title of a serial or integrating resource appears on the source of information for the title proper in full as well as in the form of an acronym or initialism, choose the full form as the title proper.” (Click on the image to enlarge)

RDA EXCEPTIONS
"Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)".
How to decide whether to apply the alternatives, options, or exceptions?
Whether to apply the alternatives, options, or exceptions is cataloger judgment, unless an LC practice has been identified in an LC-PCC PS (for LC catalogers). Each library or cataloging agency must decide whether or not to use each of these alternatives and options. This can be done by choosing one or more of the following approaches: (a) Establishing local policies for all options and alternatives, or (b) Establishing local policies for some, but not all, options and alternatives, or (c) Following the policy statements of other libraries and programs, such as the Library of Congress-Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements (LC-PCC PS) or British Library Policy Statements (BL PS), or (d) Allowing individual catalogers to use their judgement who are responsible of creating the metadata for the bibliographic items.

Unlike alternatives and options, exceptions are not subordinate to general instructions, therefore RDA exceptions generally do not require policy statements, although some exceptional situations may require some additional clarification. Exceptions must be followed when applicable. They are provided when it is necessary to depart from a rule’s instructions because of a specific type of resource or situation.

Note on the use of screen images from RDA Toolkit: Screen images from RDA Toolkit is used here for educational and research (non-profit) purposes by following the RDA and RDA Toolkit Copyright Statement, which says: "You are free to copy, distribute, and otherwise share screen images of RDA Toolkit for educational purposes, including training, classroom or online teaching, presentations, review, evaluation, internal library use, and handouts for related activities. You may not use RDA Toolkit screen images for commercial gain, and may not alter, transform, or build upon them without written permission from the Co-Publishers. Each use of an image from RDA Toolkit should be attributed as follows: "Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)"."

Author: Salman Haider [Revised 2016-03-30 | Written 2016-03-30]


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

Monday, March 28, 2016

RDA Core Elements

Contents:
  • Definition of RDA Core Elements
  • Types RDA Core Elements
  • Examples of RDA Core Elements

Core Elements  Core elements in Resource Description & Access (RDA) are minimum elements required for describing resources. Core elements are a new feature of RDA which allowed for certain metadata elements to be identified as “required” in the cataloging process. The assignment of core status is based on attributes mandatory for a national level record, as documented in the FRBR/FRAD modules. At a minimum, a bibliographic description should include all the required core elements that are applicable. Core-ness is identified at the element level. Some elements are always core (if applicable and the information is available); some are core only in certain situations. Core elements are identified in two ways within RDA. The first is that all core elements are discussed in general, and listed as a group, in the sub-instructions of "RDA 0.6: Core Elements". In the separate chapters, the core elements are also identified individually by the label “CORE ELEMENT” at the beginning of the instructions for each element. They are clearly labeled in light blue at each core instruction in RDA Toolkit.  If the status of an element as core depends upon the situation, an explanation appears after the “Core element” label.

See, for example, this label for the core element for the title.
        2.3. Title
                CORE ELEMENT
             The title proper is a core element. Other titles are optional.

The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) for the development of RDA decided it would be preferable to designate certain elements as “core” rather than designating all elements as either “required” or “optional.” Decisions on core elements were made in the context of the FRBR and FRAD user tasks.
AACR2 provided three levels of bibliographic description. The first level, also known as minimal-level cataloging, contains, at least, the elements that basically identify the resource without providing and detailed description. The second level, also known as standard-level cataloging, provides all applicable elements to uniquely all copies for a manifestation. The third level represents full description and contains all elements provided in the rules that are applicable to the item being described. RDA does not define levels of description, instead, it identifies a number of elements as core elements. Core elements in RDA are similar to AACR2 minimal-level cataloging bibliographic description.

RDA Core Elements comprises elements that fulfill the user tasks of find, identify, and select. Only one instance of a core element is required. Subsequent instances are optional. For example, for the core element “Place of Publication” the RDA instruction states: “If more than one place of publication appears on the source of information, only the first recorded is required. If all the core elements (that are applicable) are recorded and a resource is still indistinguishable from another resource(s), then additional metadata is necessary. Additional metadata elements, beyond the core, are included based on the necessity for differentiation, policy statements, cataloger’s judgment, and/or local institutional policies. Catalogers should make a proper judgment about what additional elements or multiple values of a single element are necessary to make the catalog record understandable and the cataloged resource discoverable.

Types of Core Elements:
  • RDA Core: Required elements that are always core as prescribed in RDA
  • RDA Core if: Core, if applicable and Core, if the information is available
  • LC Core and LC-PCC Core: Core elements prescribed by LC and PCC in addition to RDA Core and RDA Core if. (Some other institutions also have their own set of core elements)
Examples of RDA Core Elements:

Title
Statement of responsibility
Edition statement
Numbering of serials
  • 2.6.2 Numeric and/or alphabetic designation of first issue or part of sequence (for first or only sequence)
  • 2.6.3 Chronological designation of first issue or part of sequence (for first or only sequence)
  • 2.6.4 Numeric and/or alphabetic designation of last issue or part of sequence (for last or only sequence)
  • 2.6.5 Chronological designation of last issue or part of sequence (for last or only sequence)
  • For more details see: Numbering of Serials in RDA Cataloging
Production statement
Publication statement
Series statement
  • 2.12.2 Title proper of series
  • 2.12.9 Numbering within the series
  • 2.12.10 Title proper of subseries
  • 2.12.17 Numbering within subseries
Identifier for the manifestation
Carrier type
  • 3.3 Carrier type
Extent
  • 3.4 Extent (only if the resource is complete or if the total extent is known)

LC RDA CORE ELEMENTS (combination of RDA “Core” and RDA “Core if” elements plus additional elements)


Used for: RDA Core Elements

Glossary of Library & Information Science

All librarians and information professionals may use information from Glossary of Library & Information Science for their writings and research, with proper attribution and citation. I would appreciate it if you would let me know, too! Please cite as given below:

MLA: Haider, Salman. "Glossary of Library & Information Science." (2015)
Chicago: Haider, Salman. "Glossary of Library & Information Science." (2015)

See also:
Please provide us your valuable feedback in the Guest Book on Contact Us page to make Librarianship Studies & Information Technology Blog a better place for information on Library and Information Science and Information Technology related to libraries. Let us know your review of this definition of Core Elements. You can also suggest edits/additions to this description of Core Elements.

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

Saturday, February 13, 2016

Undifferentiated Personal Names in RDA Cataloging

Resource Description and Access (RDA)

Undifferentiated Personal Names in Resource Description and Access (RDA) Cataloging Rules: guidelines, best practices, and examples

Contents:
  • What is a Name Authority Record for Person
  • What is an undifferentiated Name Authority Record
  • What is the latest best practice on undifferentiated Name Authority Record
  • Maintenance of existing undifferentiated records
  • Examples of maintenance of undifferentiated Name Authority Records
  • RDA attributes to create a unique authorized access point for the person being established
  • Questions and Answers
Author: Salman Haider [Revised 2016-02-16 | Written 2014-02-02]


What is a Name Authority Record for Person: According to Glossary of Library & Information Science of Librarianship Studies and Information Technology blog  Name Authority Record is a record which gives the authoritative form (the form selected for a heading) of a personal name in the library catalog or the file of bibliographic records, and are listed in an authority file containing headings of library items. To ensure consistency, an authority record is created for each authorized heading (authorized access point) for a proper name. An authority record is made when a heading is established, i.e., authorized for use as the main entry or an added entry for the first time, while cataloging of a library item. 

What is an Undifferentiated Name Authority Record: Following is a description of undifferentiated name authority record taken from the Glossary of Library & Information Science of Librarianship Studies and Information Technology blog:

Authority Record : Glossary of Library & Information Science: ... ... ... Most name authority records for personal names are unique. This means each authority record represents a single person. Library cataloging standards like Resource Description and Access (RDA) and Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2) provide guidelines to create a name authority record and additions to names to create a unique authorized access point for the person being established (such as date of birth, date of death, fuller form of name, etc.). But there are situations where two or more people having the same name require to be represented in the authority file by the creation of authority records for them and there are not much information available to differentiate between these persons. Distinguishing elements like their date of birth, date of death, fuller form, etc. cannot be determined from the source document as well as reference sources and no other information can be found to break the conflict. So a previous practice by catalogers was to create an “undifferentiated name authority record” for an “undifferentiated personal name” where the same authorized access point (heading) is used to represent two or more persons in the catalog. There are two ways to recognize an undifferentiated personal name authority record in a MARC 21 authority record. One way is to check the 008 fixed field. The position 32 in 008 fixed field is for “undifferentiated personal name”; if this field contains the letter “b”, then the record is an undifferentiated personal name record (letter “a” represents differentiated personal name). A second way of identifying an undifferentiated name authority record for a person is to check the NAR with a distinctive pattern of 670 fields in pairs where each pair represents a different person. The first 670 in each pair will contain a phrase such as [Author of … … …], [Editor of … … …], [Illustrator of … … … ] in square brackets. The second 670 the title of the work associated with that person. See below an example of an undifferentiated name authority record for a person from the Library of Congress Name Authority File.

What is the latest best practice on undifferentiated Name Authority Record: The latest best practice is not to make an undifferentiated name authority record in RDA (though RDA rules permit it and was made in AACR2 cataloging). Two important points are:  (1). Do not create a new undifferentiated name authority record.  (2). Do not add a new name to the--to an existing undifferentiated name authority record.

DCM Z1 008/32 that contains the workflow for resolving undifferentiated names has been updated.

Here is what you should do, but see the updated instruction in its entirety as well on the  PCC web site


Maintenance of existing undifferentiated records:

When information is found to distinguish a person included in an existing undifferentiated name record:

• Always create a new name authority record for that person, with distinguishing information

• Transfer information pertaining to that person from the undifferentiated name record and edit as necessary.

• If more than one identity remains in the undifferentiated NAR, and there is not sufficient information in the NAR to create new NARs for each name, leave the NAR coded AACR2.

In order to facilitate machine processing of authority records (e.g., matching, linking), when only one identity is left on an undifferentiated personal name authority record (i.e., other identities are being disambiguated and removed), take the following steps:

LC catalogers:

• Create a new differentiated NAR for the remaining single identity; the heading itself may be identical to the heading in the undifferentiated NAR   
• Delete the undifferentiated NAR.
• Add the LCCN (010) of the deleted NAR in subfield $z of the newly created  NAR(s).  
• Always add a 667 note to a new NAR to identify the LCCN of the authority record in which information about that person had been recorded:

667 ## $a Formerly on undifferentiated name record: [LCCN of undifferentiated name record]


NACO catalogers:
  • Assure that the undifferentiated NAR only contains information relevant to the single identity remaining (e.g., 670s)
  • Add a 667 field to the undifferentiated NAR: 667 ## $a Last identity on undifferentiated record; reported for deletion.
  • Report the undifferentiated NAR for deletion to naco@loc.gov ; LC will create a new replacement NAR and delete the old record

Examples of an undifferentiated name authority record:

Example 1: Undifferentiated NAR http://lccn.loc.gov/n85108043 is deleled and two other differentiated Name Authority Records are made http://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233198 and http://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233199

LC control no.:n 85108043
LCCN permalink:http://lccn.loc.gov/n85108043
HEADING:Singh, Rajvir
00000960cz a2200205n 450
0013861047
00520141218075944.0
008851219n| acannaab |a aba
010__ |a n 85108043
035__ |a (DLC)n 85108043
040__ |a DLC |b eng |c DLC |d DLC
10010 |a Singh, Rajvir
40000 |a Rajvir Singh
667__ |a THIS 1XX FIELD CANNOT BE USED UNDER RDA UNTIL THIS UNDIFFERENTIATED RECORD HAS BEEN HANDLED FOLLOWING THE GUIDELINES IN DCM Z1 008/32
670__ |a [Author of U.S.--Pakistan and India]
670__ |a His U.S.--Pakistan and India, strategic relations, 1985: |b t.p. (Rajvir Singh) jkt. (Dr.; M.Sc. in defence & military studies; D.Phil. in defence studies; currently with Soc. Sc. Inst. for Advanced Study, Allahabad)
670__ |a [Author of Digital design with Verilog HDL]
670__ |a Sternheim, E. Digital design with Verilog HDL, 1990 : |b t.p. (Rajvir Singh, Nexgen Microsystems)
952__ |a *bd12 040 055 057 04-24-91

<<<<<---------->>>>>


LC control no.:n 2015233198
LCCN Permalink:https://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233198
HEADING:Singh, Rajvir (Professor in defence and strategic studies)
00001411cz a2200229n 450
0019896894
00520150627024424.0
008150627n| azannaabn |a aaa
010__ |a n 2015233198 |z n 85108043
040__ |a DLC |b eng |e rda |c DLC
1001_ |a Singh, Rajvir |c (Professor in defence and strategic studies)
370__ |a Alīgarh (India : District) |e Ayodhya (Faizabad, India) |2 naf
372__ |a Defence studies |a Strategic studies
373__ |a K.S. Saket P.G. College (Ayodhya, Faizabad, India) |2 naf
374__ |a Professor in defence and strategic studies
375__ |a male
377__ |a eng |a hin
4000_ |a Rajvir Singh |c (Professor in defence and strategic studies)
4001_ |a Siṃha, Rājavīra |c (Professor in defence and strategic studies)
667__ |a Formerly on undifferentiated name record: [n 85108043]
670__ |a His U.S.--Pakistan and India, strategic relations, 1985: |b t.p. (Rajvir Singh) jkt. (Dr.; M.Sc. in defence & military studies; D.Phil. in defence studies; currently with Soc. Sc. Inst. for Advanced Study, Allahabad)
670__ |a Rājanaitika aparādhīkaraṇa aura bhrashṭācāra ke sāye meṃ lokatantra aura rāshṭrīya surakshā, 2014: |b title page (Ḍô. Rājavīra Siṃha) title page verso (Rajvir Singh) jacket (Associate Professor in Department of Defence and Strategic Studies, K.S. Saket P.G. College, Ayodhya, Faizabad; born in Aligarh district)

<<<<<---------->>>>>

LC control no.:
n 2015233199
LCCN Permalink:https://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233199
HEADING:Singh, Rajvir
00000526cz a2200169n 450
0019896895
00520150627025153.0
008150627n| azannaabn |a aaa
010__ |a n 2015233199 |z n 85108043
040__ |a DLC |b eng |e rda |c DLC
1001_ |a Singh, Rajvir
373__ |a Nexgen Microsystems
375__ |a male
377__ |a hin
4000_ |a Rajvir Singh
667__ |a Formerly on undifferentiated name record: [n 85108043]
670__ |a Sternheim, E. Digital design with Verilog HDL, 1990 : |b t.p. (Rajvir Singh, Nexgen Microsystems)

<<<<<---------->>>>>

Undifferentiated NAR http://lccn.loc.gov/no2009136357 is deleted and two other differentiated Name Authority Records are made http://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233930 and http://lccn.loc.gov/n2015233931

<<<<<---------->>>>>

008/32 Undifferentiated Personal Name 

General
When creating an NAR for a family name assign value “n” in 008/32. 
As of November 2013, LC and the PCC have agreed to the following guidelines for persons whose preferred names are identical: 
• Do not use code “b” in an RDA name authority record; all personal name authority records coded RDA should be differentiated. 
• Do not add a new identity to an existing personal name authority record coded 008/32 “b” 

Instead, apply one of the following RDA attributes to create a unique authorized access point for the person being established (See RDA 9.19): 
date of birth (9.3.2) 
• date of death (9.3.3) 
• fuller form of name (9.5) 
• period of activity (9.3.4) 
• profession or occupation (9.16) 
• title of the person, including terms of rank, honor, or office (9.4) 
• other designation associated with the person (9.6)
Resource Description and Access (RDA)

Questions and Answers:

Question: The LC/NACO policy now says no longer use/creation of undifferentiated personal name records, but RDA tells us that you can have an undifferentiated personal name authority records, so what to do?

Answer: Yes RDA permits the creation and use of undifferentiated personal name records (according to RDA 8.11.1.1.)  But now under RDA, Chapter 9 for personal names, it is allowed to adding qualifiers to names (see above point RDA attributes to create a unique authorized access point for the person being established). So a best practice is incorporated into the Descriptive Cataloging Manual Z1 where it is suggested to no longer create a name authority record.

Question:  RDA says that it's okay to have an undifferentiated personal name, but you have to go to DCM Z1, the instruction sheet for the 008/32, to find out how to deal with personal name undifferentiated records under NACO policy now.  So how often is the DCM updated and where can I find the DCM Z1 document?

Answer: The DCM Z-1 is available on Cataloger's Desktop, and it's also available on the Library of Congress website policy page.  And it's updated quarterly just as the RDA Toolkit is updated quarterly.  A link to DCM Z1 is also provided in Cataloger's Reference Directory (check DCM Z1 for complete details).

Question: Will this RDA Blog post be revised periodically to reflect the latest changes in the best practices.

Answer:  Yes, this RDA Blog post will be revised periodically to reflect the latest changes in the best practices.

Comments: 

Aaron Kuperman, Law Cataloger at Library of Congress, United States [2016-02-15] -- At LC, there are no undifferentiated names. If a professional qualifer won't solve the problem, a "writer on [topic]" will work. Anyone who even knows what an undifferentiated personal name heading is was is now officially considered to be showing their age."

Sources: Chiefly based on information from Library of Congress; other sources consulted are Resource Description and Access (RDA) blog, Librarianship Studies and Information Technology blog, RDA Toolkit, Cataloger's Desktop

See also:

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

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

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Date of Publication Distribution Copyright in RDA & MARC 21 Field 264 Examples

Resource Description and 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
  • What are the Sources of Information for Date of Distribution in RDA
  • Recording Date of Distribution
  • Dates of the Non-Gregorian or Julian Calendar; Dates in the Form of Chronogram
  • Multipart Monographs, Serials, and Integrating Resources
  • Date of Distribution Not Identified in a Single-Part Resource
  • Copyright Date
  • Coreness for Copyright Date
  • Where the Rules are for Copyright Date in RDA
  • What are the Sources of Copyright Date in RDA
  • Recording Copyright Dates
  • Other RDA Blog posts on Publication, Distribution, and Copyright Date

Core Element: Date of publication is a Core Element; If the date of publication appears on the source of information in more than one calendar, only the date in the calendar preferred by the agency preparing the description is required.

How Date of Publication is defined: According to the Glossary of Library and Information Science of Librarianship Studies and Information Technology blog, a date of publication is a date associated with the publication, release, or issuing of a document. The date of publication is the year in which the edition, revision, etc., described in the edition area was published. If there is no edition area, the date of the first publication of the edition to which the item belongs is considered the publication date. There are special set of rules for transcription and recording of date of publication in library cataloging standards, e.g. in RDA rules for date of publication is given in chapter 2 of Resource Description and Access (RDA). In Anglo-American Cataloging Rules 2nd edition (AACR2), rules for date of publication, distribution etc. for books are given in chapter 2 (2.4F).

Where the Rules are for Date of Publication in RDA: Look at instruction 2.8.6 in RDA Toolkit

What are the Sources of Information for Date of Publication in RDA: Take dates of publication from the following sources (in order of preference):

a) the same source as the title proper (see 2.3.2.2)

b) another source within the resource itself (see 2.2.2)

c) one of the other sources of information specified under 2.2.4.

How is Date of Publication Transcribed / Recorded in Resource Description and Access (RDA): Record the date of publication applying the basic 2.8.1 instructions on recording publication statements, using the form in which it appears on the source of information.

Example:
Source: Published in 2016
264  #1   ..., $c 2016.

Apply the guidelines on capitalization, punctuation, symbols, abbreviations, etc. given under 1.7.

Per LC-PCC PS 1.8.2 (First Alternative), transcribe roman numerals for publication dates; do not convert to Arabic. If the year appears only in Roman numerals, add the year in Arabic numerals, in brackets.

Example:
Source: MMXVI
264  #1   ..., $c MMXVI [2016]

Dates of the Non-Gregorian or Julian Calendar; Dates in the Form of Chronogram
  • LC-PCC PS 2.8.6.3: Add the corresponding date or dates of the Gregorian or Julian calendar if the date appearing in the resource is not of the Gregorian or Julian calendar.
Examples:

Source: 5630
264  #1   ..., $c 5630 [1869 or 1870]

Source: Heisei 1 
264  #1   ..., $c Heisei 1 [1989]

Source: anno 18
264  #1   ..., $c anno 18 [1939]

Source: Samvat 2000
264  #1   ..., $c Samvat 2000 [1943]

If the date as it appears on the resource is represented in different calendars, record the dates in the order indicated by the sequence, layout, or typography of the dates on the source of information.

Example:
Source: 4333 - 2000
264  #1   ..., $c 4333, 2000.

Resource Description and Access RDA

Question: What to do if the date on the resource is incorrect. Answer: If the date as it appears in the resource is known to be fictitious or incorrect, make a note giving the actual date

Example: Probable year of publication based on date range in which the publisher was active: Date of publication recorded as: [1969?]
  • LC-PCC PS 2.8.6.4: Record a supplied date in numerals instead of giving the chronogram. (A chronogram is a sentence or inscription in which specific letters, interpreted as numerals, stand for a particular date when rearranged). Indicate that the information was taken from a source outside the resource itself. Example: [1945]
Multipart Monographs, Serials, and Integrating Resources

RDA Rule 2.8.6.5 is for Multipart Monographs, Serials, and Integrating Resources

If the first issue, part, or iteration of a multipart monograph, serial, or integrating resource is available, record the date of publication of that issue, part, or iteration, followed by a hyphen.
Example: 1988-

If publication of the resource has ceased or is complete and the first and last issues, parts, or iterations are available, record the dates of publication of those issues, parts, or iterations, separated by a hyphen.
Example: 1968-1973

If publication of the resource has ceased or is complete and the last issue, part, or iteration is available, but not the first, record the publication date of the last issue, part, or iteration, preceded by a hyphen.
Example: -1977

For an integrating resource, supply the date of the last update if it is considered to be important.
Example: 1995–1998 [updated 1999] [First and last published iterations of an updating loose-leaf available; date of last update known]

If the date of publication is the same for all issues, parts, or iterations, record only that date as the single date. Example: 1997

If the first and/or last issue, part, or iteration is not available, supply an approximate date or dates.

Example: [1998]- [Earliest issue available: v. 1, no. 3, July 1998]
1997-[2000] [Last part not available but information about ending date known]
[1988-1991] [First and last issues not available but information about beginning and ending dates known]

If the date or dates cannot be approximated, do not record a date of publication.

Date of Publication not Identified in a Single-Part Resource

RDA Rule 2.8.6.6 is for Date of Publication not Identified in a Single-Part Resource

If the date of publication is not identified in the single-part resource, supply the date or approximate date of publication. Apply the instructions in 1.9.2 on supplied dates (see p. 27).

If an approximate date of publication for a single-part resource cannot reasonably be determined, record [date of publication not identified].

But see the next page for important LC practice in such situations …………………
Look at LC-PCC PS 2.8.6.6

Supply a probable date of publication, if possible, using the guidelines below, rather than give “[date of publication not identified].”

A. If an item lacking a publication date contains only a copyright date, apply the following in the order listed:

1. Supply a date of publication that corresponds to the copyright date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date.
Example:
Title page verso: Copyright ©2009
Prefaced signed: June 2009
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … $b … $c [2009]
008/06: s
008/07-10: 2009
008/11-14: ####

2. If the copyright date is for the year following the year in which the publication is received, supply a date of publication that corresponds to the copyright date.
Example:
Title page verso: ©2009
Item received in: 2008
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … $b … $c [2009]
optionally: 264 #4 $c ©2009
008/06: t
008/07-10: 2009
008/11-14: 2009

B. If an item lacking a publication date contains a copyright date and a date of manufacture and the year is the same for both, supply a date of publication that corresponds to that date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date.
Example:
Title page verso: ©1980//1980 printing
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … $b … $c [1980]
008/06: s
008/07-10: 1980
008/11-14: ####

C. If an item lacking a publication date contains a copyright date and a date of manufacture and the years differ, supply a date of publication that corresponds to the copyright date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date. A manufacture date may also be recorded as part of a manufacture statement if determined useful by the cataloger, or record it in MARC field 588 as a Note on issue, part, or iteration used as the basis for identification of a resource (2.20.13)
Example:
Title page verso: ©1978//Sixth Printing 1980
Prefaced signed: June 1978
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … $b … $c [1978]
optionally: 264 #3 $a … $b … $c 1980.
588 ## $a Description based on sixth printing, 1980.
008/06: s
008/07-10: 1978
008/11-14: ####

D. If an item contains only a date of distribution, apply the following in the order listed:
1. Supply a date of publication that corresponds to the distribution date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date. Also record a date of distribution as part of a distribution statement if determined useful by the cataloger.
Example:
Title page verso: Distributed 2008
Bibliography includes citations to 2007 publications
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a London :$b Gay Mens Press, $c [2008]
008/06: s
008/07-10: 2008
008/11-14: ####
optionally: also give 264 #2 $a Chicago, IL : Distributed in North America by InBook/LPC Group, $c 2008

2. If it does not seem reasonable to assume that the distribution date is a likely publication date, supply a date of publication, in square brackets, based on the information provided. Also record the distribution date as part of a distribution statement if determined useful by the cataloger.
Example:
Title page verso: Distributed in the USA in 1999
Prefaced signed: London, January 1993
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … :$b … $c [between 1993 and 1999]
008/06: q
008/07-10: 1993
008/11-14: 1999

E. If an item lacking a publication date contains only a date of manufacture, apply the following in the order listed:

1. Supply a date of publication that corresponds to the manufacture date, in square brackets, if it seems reasonable to assume that date is a likely publication date. For books, this means that the item is assumed to be the first printing of the edition. Also record the manufacture date as part of a manufacture statement if determined useful by the cataloger.
Example:
Title page verso: First Printing 1980
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … :$b … $c [1980]
008/06: s
008/07-10: 1980
008/11-14: ####

2. If the date of manufacture given implies that it is not likely the same as the date of publication, supply a date of publication, in square brackets, using the information provided. Also record the date of manufacture as part of a manufacture statement if determined useful by the cataloger, or record it in MARC field 588 as a Note on issue, part, or iteration used as the basis for identification of a resource.
Example:
Title page verso: 15th Impression 1980
Date of publication: not given

Transcription: 264 #1 $a … :$b … $c [not after 1980]
optionally: 588 ## $a Description based on 15th impression, 1980.
008/06: q
008/07-10: uuuu
008/11-14: 1980

Supplying Dates (Date of Publication Not Identified in the Resource)
RDA 1.9.2 shows examples of supplying dates

Actual year known: 264 … $c [2010]

Either one of two consecutive years: 264 … $c [2009 or 2010]

Probable year: 264 … $c [2010?]

Probable range of years: 264 … $c [between 2008 and 2010?]

Earliest and/or latest possible date known:
264 … $c [not before January 15, 2010]
264 … $c [not before September 3, 1779]  - earliest date is known
264 … $c [not after August 21, 1492]  - latest date is known
264 …$c [between October 25, 1899 and February 25, 1900]  - both earliest and latest dates are known

Importance of Supplying Probable Place and Date of Publication
LC Policy strongly encourages you to supply a probable place of publication and a probable date of publication when this information is not on the resource. This helps with displays, and limits by place and date in OPACs. If you cannot supply this data, you will need to record Distribution data, and perhaps even Manufacture data.
  • Distribution elements are Core Elements ONLY if Publication data can not be identified. So you can save yourself the trouble of recording distribution data by supplying place and date of publication. And you can use distribution or manufacture information to help supply place and date of publication.
As a last resort, if you have to give any distribution or manufacture information, give distribution information if present; if not, then give manufacture information. Be sure to give as complete a statement as possible.

Examples of Supplying Publication Data

Distribution statements are recorded in MARC field 264 #2. This need for a second MARC field is another reason why you are strongly encouraged to supply publication data if at all possible.

These examples illustrate how supplying publication data is easier -- and perfectly acceptable:

Example A:
On source: ABC Publishers, 2009
Distributed by Iverson Company, Seattle

RDA: 264 #1 $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b ABC Publishers, $c 2009.
264 #2 $a Seattle : $b distributed by Iverson Company, $c [2009]

LC-Recommended: 264 #1 $a [Seattle?] : $b ABC Publishers, $c 2009.

Example B:
On source: On title page: Means Pub. Co., Omaha, Nebraska
On title page verso: 2009 distribution

RDA: 264 #1 $a Omaha, Nebraska : $b Means Pub. Co., $c [date of publication not identified]
264 #2 $a [Place of distribution not identified]: $b [distributor not identified], $c 2009.

LC-Recommended: 264 #1 $a Omaha, Nebraska : $b Means Pub. Co., $c [2009?]

But sometimes distribution information must be provided when probable publisher information cannot be supplied:

Example C:
On jewel box: Published in 2010 in Providence; distributed in Boston and Ottawa by KL, Inc.

RDA and LC: 264 #1 $a Providence : $b [publisher not identified], $c 2010.
264 #2 $a Boston ; $a Ottawa : $b KL, Inc., $c [2010]

OTHER RDA EXAMPLES OF DATES:

Title page verso:
First published, ALA Editions, 1955
Reissued 1985 by Facet Publishing
Reprint edition 2016 by Libraries Unlimited, New York
264  #1   New York : $b Libraries Unlimited, $c 2016.

Title page verso:
First published in 1985  Sixth printing 1990
264  #1  ..., $c1985.

Title page date:  1996
Title page verso:
First printed, 1997
264  #1  ...,$c 1996 [that is, 1997]

Title page verso:
First published in 1973
Sixth printing 1975
264  #1   ..., $c 1973.

Title page verso: May 2016
264  #1   ..., $c May 2016.

Date of Distribution 
Date of distribution is a Core Element for a resource in a published form if the date of publication is not identified.

Where the Rules are for Date of Distribution in RDA: Look at instruction 2.9.6

What are the Sources of Information for Date of Distribution in RDA: 
Sources: Take dates of distribution from the following sources (in order of preference):
a) the same source as the title proper (see 2.3.2.2)
b) another source within the resource itself (see 2.2.2)
c) one of the other sources of information specified under 2.2.4.

For multipart monographs and serials, take the beginning and/or ending date of distribution from the first and/or last released issue or part, or from another source.

For integrating resources, take the beginning and/or ending date of distribution from the first and/or last iteration, or from another source.

Recording Date of Distribution
If the date of distribution differs from the date of publication, record the date of distribution, if it is considered to be important, applying the basic instructions on recording distribution statements.

Dates of the Non-Gregorian or Julian Calendar; Dates in the Form of Chronogram
As with dates of publication, LC Policy Statements provide guidance in these situations.

Multipart Monographs, Serials, and Integrating Resources
RDA 2.8.6.5 provides guidance regarding dates in these situations.  The guidelines are similar to the guidelines for date of publication.

Date of Distribution Not Identified in a Single-Part Resource
  • If the date of distribution is not identified in a single-part resource, supply the date or an approximate date of distribution. Apply the instructions on supplied dates given under 1.9.2. 
  • If an approximate date of distribution for a single-part resource cannot reasonably be determined, record [date of distribution not identified]. 
  • If the resource is in an unpublished form (e.g., a manuscript, a painting, a sculpture), record nothing in the date of distribution element.
Copyright Date 

CORENESS for LC: Give a copyright date for a single-part monograph if neither the date of publication nor the date of distribution is identified.  You are not required to record copyright dates for multipart monographs, serials, and integrating resources.
A copyright date is a date associated with a claim of protection under copyright.

Where the Rules are for Copyright Date in RDA:Look at instruction 2.11
What are the Sources of Copyright Date in RDA: Take information on copyright dates from any source.

Recording Copyright Dates
Record copyright dates, applying the general guidelines on numbers given under 1.8.  Precede the date by the copyright symbol © or the phonogram symbol , or by “copyright” or “phonogram” if the symbol cannot be reproduced.  If the resource has multiple copyright dates that apply to various aspects (e.g., text, sound, graphics), record only the latest copyright date.

Copyright date is recorded in MARC field 264, second indicator 4; $c is the only subfield used.

Examples:
  264 #4 $c ©2002
264 #4 $c ℗1983

Source : Based on information from Library of CongressRDA Blog, OCLC and RDA Toolkit

Author: Salman Haider [Revised 2016-02-12 | Written 2016-02-04]

See also other RDA Blog posts on Publication, Distribution, and Copyright Date:
  
Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

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