[DCRM-L] more on expansion of abbreviations (for RDA) at OCLC

[Schaffner,Jennifer]

Dear colleagues:

Some will recall concerns on this list the spring about expanding abbreviations. (Of course, items coded as "rare materials" in the 040 $e are not touched.)

Our concern was largely with transcriptions in fields such as 245, 250 or 260. Evidently implementation of RDA (https://oclc.org/rda/new-policy.en.html) spells out changes for *non-transcribed* abbreviations; in this case, changing the Latin abbreviations to English phrases.  If the Latin abbreviation is part of the transcription of data from the item itself, it is not spelled out or changed to an English equivalent.

One OCLC colleague used these examples to help me understand what we are doing with Latin abbreviations:


*         245 $c "... [et al.]"  becomes "[and others]"

*         255  and 300 substitute the spelled out English equivalent "approximately" for the Latin abbreviation "ca."

*         260:  Substitute spelled out English equivalents for Latin abbreviations in the 260 field:

-          "[Place of publication not identified]" replaces "[S.l.]"

-          "[publisher not identified] replaces [s.n.]"

It looks to me like perhaps changes are largely triggered by square brackets in strings? Does this begin to answer questions? I am probably the person least qualified to try to communicate about the nitty-gritty.

Jen

******************************
Jennifer Schaffner
Program Officer
OCLC Research Library Partnership


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20140520/b0ff3c3f/attachment.html>