[DCRM-L] RDA or DCRM(B)? abbreviations, brackets, and errors

[Joan Milligan]

Wonderful, Francis! Thank you for your concise and understandable answers.

Deborah, yes, of course you're right; I wasn't thinking about OCLC's
manipulations. I can see what you mean about additional access points;
examples would be publishers, former owners, etc.? Uniform titles,
obviously. What else? I suppose an access point for related manifestations
wouldn't be used very much, except for online versions? Have you ever used
a 7XX with something like "$i Container of (work)"?

Notes of any other prominent DCRM(B) vs. RDA situations are welcome!

Thanks so much,

Joan

Joan Milligan
Special Collections Cataloger
University of Dayton Libraries
300 College Park
Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360
937-229-4075
jmilligan1 at udayton.edu



On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Deborah J. Leslie <DJLeslie at folger.edu>
wrote:

> Thanks to Francis for replying to Joan's specific questions. I'd like to
> respond to her musings on recognizing RDA-compliant DCRM(B) records. The
> good news: catalogers aren't left to adjudicate conflicts between DCRM and
> RDA on their own.
>
>
>
>
>
> RDA-compliant DCRM records indicate that the DCRM manuals provide the
> basic instruction, but certain elements are formulated a bit more like RDA,
> as instructed by the BIBCO Standard Record. In practical terms, start with
> DCRM(B) and check whether the BSR requires any modification for individual
> elements. Save going to RDA first for access points.
>
>
>
> There's only one truly valid way of identifying RDA-compliant DCRM(B)
> records, which is the coding in Descriptive conventions (LDR/18)
> <https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdleader.html> and the 040.
>
>
>
> Classic DCRM(B):                       LDR/18=a   040=ǂe dcrmb
>
> Straight RDA:                                LDR/18=i   040=ǂe rda
>
> RDA-compliant DCRM(B):      LDR/18=i   040=ǂe rda ǂe dcrmb
>
>
>
> The use of 264 instead of 260 comes in a close second, though. A record
> with 264's but without an 040 ǂe rda should be considered an anomaly.
>
>
>
> Spelling out of "pages" &c. in the 300 is a false friend: certain
> automatic manipulations made by OCLC (and offered by other vendors)
> expanded these abbreviations on many records, thereby blurring consistency
> and identification of the descriptive code used.
>
>
>
> 33X's were added to MARC because of an RDA requirement, but their use is
> compatible in non-RDA records; their presence doesn't anything one way or
> another about the descriptive code used.
>
>
>
> Additional access points have long been a marker of rare materials
> cataloging, so their presence doesn't say anything one way or another about
> the descriptive code used.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Deborah
>
>
>
> Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | djleslie at folger.edu |
>
>
>
> *From:* dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] *On
> Behalf Of *Joan Milligan
> *Sent:* Monday, 03 July, 2017 11:55
> *To:* dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
> *Subject:* [DCRM-L] RDA or DCRM(B)? abbreviations, brackets, and errors
>
>
>
> Hello, everyone,
>
>
>
> I’m new to this list and new to DCRM(B), so forgive me if you’ve had this
> discussion before. I know RDA is in flux and therefore decisions about its
> relationship to DCRM(B) is not complete. I'd be interested in common
> practice, however.
>
>
>
> (In addition to looking at an 040) I can recognize an RDA and DCRM(B) bib
> by these things:
>
>
>
> 1. Use of 264 fields
>
>
>
> 2. Use of 33Xs
>
>
>
> 3. Additional access points (such as "Recording Relationships between
> Works, Expressions, Manifestations, & Items.")
>
>
>
> However, I am less sure about the relationship between RDA and DCRM(B) in
> these examples (meaning, which one overrides the other?):
>
>
>
> 1. Spell out words: I’ve been using “pages” not “p.” and “illustrations”
> not “ill,” as I have seen in examples. But the BIBCO Standard Record: RDA
> Metadata Application File says “Use Descriptive Cataloging of Rare
> Materials as the “designated published style manual” in place of
> instructions given under RDA 1.72-1.79 for transcribing punctuation,
> numerals, symbols, abbreviations, etc. “ Therefore, shouldn’t I be using
> “p.” and “ill.”?
>
>
>
> 2. Similarly, do people use "[12] p." or “12 unnumbered pages”? DCRM(B)
> 5B3.1 and RDA 3.4.5.3.
>
> 3.  Errors in titles, for example. DCRM(B) 0G7, 5B7.2, etc., say to use
> [i.e. …] or [sic]. RDA says transcribe as is, adding an access point for
> the version with the error (2.3.14).
>
> I appreciate your feedback!
>
>
>
> Joan
>
>
>
> Joan Milligan
>
> Special Collections Cataloger
>
> University of Dayton Libraries
>
> 300 College Park
>
> Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360
>
> 937-229-4075 <(937)%20229-4075>
>
> jmilligan1 at udayton.edu
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20170703/b3ad67fb/attachment.html>