I have a question about detailed dates of publication vs. dates of
transmittal. RDA 18.104.22.168 says to "record the date of publication" and
gives an example of "May 2000." There is no relevant LC-PCC-PS relating
to this example. Publication seem to be defined in 2.8.6.l as "a date
associated with the publication, release, or issuing of a resource."
However the LC-PCC-PS for 2.20.7 says:
LC practice/PCC practice: If a date of release or transmittal is found
on the resource and it is considered important for identification,
record it in a note if it has not been recorded elsewhere in the
bibliographic description (e.g., in the edition statement). Include the
month and day, if present.
250 ## $a Version 1.0, Release Aug. '96.
500 ## $a "May 1979"
500 ## $a "May 1, 1979"
500 ## $a "Issued May 1979"
This is similar language to the old LCRI 2.7B which says:
"When a publication has a date of release or transmittal in a prominent
position, include it in the bibliographic description. Typically these
special dates consist of month or month and day as well as year and
appear on the title page or cover. If the date is in a phrase that is
being recorded as an edition statement, so record it. If an edition
statement is not appropriate, quote the date in a note, including with
it any associated words.
"May 1, 1979"
"Issued May 1979"
Note that a date of release or transmittal is not a publication date.
If the publication lacks a copyright date or a date of manufacture (cf.
LCRI 1.4F6), the publication date may be inferred from the date of
release or transmittal. Then, give the inference in brackets in the
publication, distribution, etc., area and follow the above instructions
for the date of release or transmittal.
In case of doubt as to the character of the date, treat it as a date of
release or transmittal."
So, the question is, how would we determine that a date on the title
page which has a month or month and day is a date of transmittal rather
than a publication date? Is it the mere presence of a month or month
and day? If RDA considers "release" to be publication, is that why the
"release" example was added (contrary to the old LCRI) to indicate that
it should be an element associated with the edition statement in this
case rather than either publication or a note? However, the "Issued May
1979" example was retained, which is puzzling if RDA considers "issued"
to be published." I'm not sure of the status of the term "posted",
which occurs often in online documents.
We have been given to understand that the PSD indicates that full
publication dates must be transcribed (and so coded in MARC), though i
cannot find this anywhere in the present documentation on the LC
website. Between the current RDA rule and definition, the current
LC-PCC-PS, and the prior history of the treatment of these dates (for
which we simply gave a quoted note for a full date and inferred a year
for the publication date, pretty much whatever the character of the
date), can anyone offer any guidance on a practical means of
distinguishing a dates of publication, issuing, release, and transmittal
in terms of RDA cataloging?
Greta de Groat
Stanford University Libraries