[Heb-NACO] To Jasmin Sh. re.: More than one 264 (was: 264 bracketed dates: = or that is?

[Shinohara, Jasmin]

Thank you, yes, those are good points to remember.

Jasmin
________________________________
From: Heb-naco <heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu> on behalf of Kohn, Roger <rkoh at loc.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 4:17:19 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: [Heb-NACO] To Jasmin Sh. re.: More than one 264 (was: 264 bracketed dates: = or that is?


---

Jasmin,

You asked if you missed anything, here what I would say:

We should remember that there is more than one 264 in the MARC format

So far the discussion has been concentrated on the 264 – 1

Copyright dates can be recorded in 264 – 4

For clarity sake, it might be helpful to address all the aspects of transcribing the date found on the book in the various 264 offered by the MARC format …

There is also to keep in mind the concept of RDA “Core”, “LC Core” and “cataloger’s judgment”, in other words: what is mandated, what is preferred and/or what can be ignored according to RDA  …

So, I am not sure that your “Putting 1. and 2. together” covers all possibilities.

All the best,

- r.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Roger Kohn
Cataloger, Israel & Judaica Section
Library of Congress
LS/ABA/ASME/IJ (4222)
LM 537
101 Independence Avenue, SE
Washington, D.C. 20540-4222
(202) 707-3997

"Opinions expressed are those of the author, and are not official statements by the Library of Congress."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces+rkoh=loc.gov at lists.osu.edu] On Behalf Of Neil Manel Frau-Cortes
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 3:26 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: Re: [Heb-NACO] 264 bracketed dates: = or that is?

I thought that in your B case we were supposed to write [Heb, that is, Greg]

Neil

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Shinohara, Jasmin <jshino at pobox.upenn.edu<mailto:jshino at pobox.upenn.edu>> wrote:
1. You write below "present on the t.p. verso" and "present on the publication"; remember that both are equivalent in terms of RDA.  The entire body of work is considered the "preferred source of information" (formerly, "chief source of information", or "csi").  Where equivalent data appears in both vernacular and Roman forms, the "=" is used to show the two "parallel" forms.

2. Unless a work _specifically_ indicates a publication dates, the dates in the 264 are bracketed.  Hence, anywhere you have either a _copyright_ or a _printing_ date, it will be in brackets.

Putting 1. and 2. together:

A. If the resource gives a date anywhere in the publication in _both_ the Hebrew and the Gregorian forms, the 264 would give both, using the = to indicate both are present.
B. If the date is something other than a publication date and appears in _both_ the Hebrew and the Gregorian forms, it will appear as [Heb. = Greg.].
C. If a publication date is ONLY given in the Heb., the Heb. form will appear without brackets and "that is" will be added to give the inferred Greg. date inside brackets.
D. If a publication date is ONLY given in the Heb., BUT there is another form of the date in the Greg. OR a more detailed Heb. date appears elsewhere in the source, the Heb. form will appear without brackets and the inferred Greg. date will be given in brackets, without either "=" or "that is" because the data is neither equivalent nor inferred.

Capiche?  Others, did I miss anything?

Jasmin

-----Original Message-----
From: Heb-naco [mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu<mailto:heb-naco-bounces at lists.osu.edu>] On Behalf Of Robert M. TALBOTT
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 2:04 PM
To: Hebrew Name Authority Funnel
Subject: [Heb-NACO] 264 bracketed dates: = or that is?

Folks:

I've been seeing an awful lot of bracketed dates utilizing the equals
(=) sign, to wit:

where only a copyright of 774 and a copyright of 2014 are present on the t.p. verso

$c [774 = 2014]

As I read the HCM (2.8.6, pp. 47-48), it appears that the equals sign is only used in instances where there are two firm dates that are unbracketed.  Again, as I understand it, inside brackets, the phrase "that is" is used.

where only a copyright of 774 and a copyright of 2014 are present on the publication

$c [774, that is, 2014]

Am I wrong? Have things changed?

Thanks

Bob
--
Bob Talbott

Principal cataloger/Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

I'm just mad about Saffron
_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco
_______________________________________________
Heb-naco mailing list
Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu<mailto:Heb-naco at lists.osu.edu>
https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/heb-naco



--

Neil M. Frau-Cortes, Ph.D.

Judaica, Hebraica and Metadata Cataloger

McKeldin Library

University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742
Phone (301) 405-9337

nfrau at umd.edu<http://nfrau@umd.edu>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/heb-naco/attachments/20160721/1fc89e9d/attachment-0001.html>