MCCUTCHEON, SEVIM | 6 Jul 18:57 2012
Picon

264 field in RDA bibliographic records

Could someone please fill me in on the uses and purposes of the 264 field, and/or point me to a resource where
it is explained?
I think I heard that it is available for use now in RDA records, but I don't see a section on it yet in OCLC's
Bibliographic Formats and Standards.

Thank you,

(Ms.) Sevim McCutcheon
Catalog Librarian, Asst. Prof.
Kent State University Libraries
330-672-1703
Lmccutch@...

--
***********************************************************************

AUTOCAT quoting guide: http://www.cwu.edu/~dcc/Autocat/copyright.html
E-mail AUTOCAT listowners:             autocat-request@...
Search AUTOCAT archives:  http://listserv.syr.edu/archives/autocat.html
  By posting messages to AUTOCAT, the author does not cede copyright

***********************************************************************

Mark Ehlert | 6 Jul 19:16 2012
Picon

Re: 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

MCCUTCHEON, SEVIM <lmccutch@...> wrote:
> Could someone please fill me in on the uses and purposes of the 264 field, and/or point me to a resource where
it is explained?
> I think I heard that it is available for use now in RDA records, but I don't see a section on it yet in OCLC's
Bibliographic Formats and Standards.

For starters:
 - MARC site: <http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html>
(probably already know this one)
 - OCLC Tech Bulletin #261:
<http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/261/default.htm>
 - PCC Guidelines: <http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/264-Guidelines.doc>

The 264s segregate publication, distribution, manufacturing, and
production statements and copyright dates into
computer-distinguishable statements.  It's an indexing thing that
mirrors RDA's separation of this same information rather than a
display thing.  On the other hand, I imagine many systems will take a
"monkey see, monkey show" approach and display these as separate
statements on the public side, such as:

 Publication: Place : Publisher, Date
 Manufacture: Printer
 Copyright date: Date

It plainly spells things out for the public, I guess.  I'm also of the
opinion that, yeah, keep the 264s, but as an option use a stylesheet
on the back-end to collapse these statements into a compact ISBD Area
4 paragraph, if only for consistency with 260/AACR2 practice.  Or do
so when the cataloging is happening via macro (i.e., convert a chain
(Continue reading)

Veve, Marielle | 6 Jul 19:22 2012
Picon

Re: 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

So far, 264 is required only for PCC libraries

--------
Marielle Veve
Cataloging & Metadata Leader
Associate Professor
Hodges Library-University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996
Phone:  (865) 974-0394
E-mail: mveve@...

-----Original Message-----
From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of Mark Ehlert
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 1:17 PM
To: AUTOCAT@...
Subject: Re: [ACAT] 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

MCCUTCHEON, SEVIM <lmccutch@...> wrote:
> Could someone please fill me in on the uses and purposes of the 264 field, and/or point me to a resource where
it is explained?
> I think I heard that it is available for use now in RDA records, but I don't see a section on it yet in OCLC's
Bibliographic Formats and Standards.

For starters:
 - MARC site: <http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html>
(probably already know this one)
 - OCLC Tech Bulletin #261:
<http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/261/default.htm>
 - PCC Guidelines: <http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/264-Guidelines.doc>

(Continue reading)

J. McRee Elrod | 6 Jul 21:10 2012
Picon

Re: 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

Mark posted:

> - PCC Guidelines: <http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/264-Guidelines.doc>

The PCC Guidelines state:

"The following guidelines assume that 260 and 264 fields may co-exist
in pre-RDA records and RDA records created before implementation of
264 ..."

This to me means that some records will have 260 and some 264 (not
that the two fields would co-exist in one record, as it might be
misunderstood to mean).  

Even though the PCC Guidelines assume 264 will be used in all future
RDA records, we will continue with 260 for these reasons:

Our investment in programming to handle records.

Our clients' present ILS.

Consistency with legacy records.

The absence of 264$e$f$g for reproductions.

We never used repeating 260 for some of the same reasons.

We think it would have been far better to reuse the long unused 260$d
to allow for separate coding of publication and copyright dates, or
have repeating $c with the copyright symbol to allow separate
(Continue reading)

Veve, Marielle | 6 Jul 19:20 2012
Picon

Re: 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

Go to:  1) "PCC Guidelines for the 264 field,"  at
http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/264-Guidelines.doc 
              2)  Then see examples applied to place, publisher, and date of publication in LCPS

--------
Marielle Veve
Cataloging & Metadata Leader
Associate Professor
Hodges Library-University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996
Phone:  (865) 974-0394
E-mail: mveve@...

-----Original Message-----
From: AUTOCAT [mailto:AUTOCAT@...] On Behalf Of MCCUTCHEON, SEVIM
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 12:57 PM
To: AUTOCAT@...
Subject: [ACAT] 264 field in RDA bibliographic records

Could someone please fill me in on the uses and purposes of the 264 field, and/or point me to a resource where
it is explained?
I think I heard that it is available for use now in RDA records, but I don't see a section on it yet in OCLC's
Bibliographic Formats and Standards.

Thank you,

(Ms.) Sevim McCutcheon
Catalog Librarian, Asst. Prof.
Kent State University Libraries
330-672-1703
(Continue reading)


Gmane