Mark et al.,
We've been discussing related RDA rules for this non-core element with the JSC this week. I'll report on resolution soon.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Ehlert
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 7:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Revised document "US RDA Test Policy for the Extra Set: Use of Existing Authority and Bibliographic Records"
Judith Kuhagen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Attached is a revision of the document with a change in how the 7XX
> field will be given in LC/NAF records. This revised version will also
> be posted on the US RDA Test documentation site
I'm curious about the changes made to the 370 fields in the examples found at the end of this revised document. The use of parentheses around the state abbreviations appears to contradict the instructions in the second half of RDA 22.214.171.124, which deals formatting place names associated with persons, families, corporate bodies, among a few other things. Am I reading the RDA rule incorrectly?
Mark K. Ehlert Minitex
Coordinator University of Minnesota Bibliographic & Technical 15 Andersen Library
Services (BATS) Unit 222 21st Avenue South
Phone: 612-624-0805 Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439 <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>