[DCRM-L] DCRM-RDA Task Force report

[Robert Maxwell]

You're right, the date elements are all treated the same as far as I can tell. But the *number* in the date element can be transcribed if that's the form preferred by the agency-for example, under "Date of Publication," 2.8.6.3 refers us to 2.8.1, which in turn (under 2.8.1.4) refers us to 1.8 for recording the number. 1.8.2 says to record numerals in the form preferred by the agency, and one possibility for the preferred form is "the form in which they appear on the source", i.e., a transcribed form. This is LC's preferred form, and that's also the form preferred for rare materials in the BSR. But that only applies to the numeral part, so in the copyright element itself there isn't any provision for transcribing the whole copyright statement, even though the numeral itself might be transcribed.  (As you said ... and I don't disagree at all that examples and guidelines would be helpful, of course!)

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568 

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.


-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Manon Theroux
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 2:29 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] DCRM-RDA Task Force report

Thanks, Bob.

Just to be clear: I wasn't suggesting the copyright date should be
transcribed as the date of publication in 264 -1 $c. I just thought
guidance for recording copyright dates in 264 -4 $c might be useful
given that DCRM only allows recording/transcribing copyright dates in
notes. Also, the whole "transcribe vs. record" issue isn't necessarily
crystal clear in the BSR itself. The chart indicates that *none* of
the date elements in the 264 field (i.e. date of production,
publication, distribution, manufacture, or copyright) are transcribed
elements and the instructions in the chart for all of these date
elements use the word "record". So, the chart makes it look like the
dates should all be treated the same way. If some of these dates (e.g.
publication) are to be transcribed and some (e.g. copyright) are to be
recorded in normalized form, having some BSC guidelines and examples
for people to refer to might be really helpful.

-Manon