Area 6 was never "kaput" in CONSER. It was turned into an *option* in the CSR. (Remember the floor vs. ceiling mantra...) Moreover, that was under AACR2, and the status of Area 6 under RDA for CONSER seems to be in limbo. The PS for 2.12 currently makes no mention at all of the series statement being optional for serials. This is an apparent oversight, and is something that needs to be resolved.
<rant>All that being said, I want to reiterate my point that I have made in some other discussion lists: the whole period-or-no-period-after-"cm" controversy is PROFOUNDLY ridiculous. The PCC policy is based ENTIRELY on an assumption that the records are being constructed specifically for display in OPACs that are following ***OLD*** ISBD punctuation guidelines, AND a specific kind of ISBD display (starting a new paragraph with Area 7). The current ISBD Consolidated Edition clearly says that there's going to be a period at the end of Area 5 regardless, according to A.3.2.3: "Each area of the description other than the first is preceded by a point, space, dash, space (. - ), unless that area is clearly separated from the preceding area by paragraphing, in which case the point, space, dash, space may be replaced by a point (.) given at the end of the preceding area." We should either say NEVER use a period after "cm" (because it's a symbol, not an abbreviation), or say ALWAYS use a period after "cm" when it's the end of the 300 field, because it's the end of an area. But of course, inconsistency is rule number one when it comes to putting ISBD punctuation into MARC records...</rant>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ed Jones
> Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 7:40 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] cm and csr
> Here is my thinking: I suppose a program could ingest such a record and
> display the data in the 8XX field in area 6 for serials and ongoing
> integrating resources (but not monographs or "monographic" integrating
> resources) or create a duplicate 4XX when these conditions applied, but
> does any program do so? And why develop such a program rather than
> just cutting-and-pasting the 8XX into the 4XX if a display of area 6 is
> Also we would have to acknowledge not all libraries have such systems--
> mine doesn't anyway--so recording the period in a particular case would
> become contingent on whether or not your library's system did so, rather
> than on a general principle.
> It's better, I think, to assume the rumors are true, and our systems are fairly
> primitive in such matters. When CONSER decided to record series only in
> 8XX, we implicitly got rid of area 6 of the description.
> Assuming that area 6 is kaput in CONSER records has the added
> advantage that we avoid the agony of having to calculate whether or not
> to add the point in any given case, and can consequently watch with
> equanimity as our monographic brethren struggle with this question
> again and again. :-)
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 24, 2013, at 14:33, "Tarango, Adolfo" <[log in to unmask]>
> > Is that really the case? True, we aren't recording the series statement in
> a 4XX field, but the resource presents us area 6 data. It's just that when
> recording the series statement following CSR practice and using the
> MARC format, we choose to record the series statement only in an 8XX
> field when the authorized form and the form on the piece are the same.
> Isn't this really a data "output" question: in cases where we record the
> series statement only in an 8XX, does the series statement "print" or
> "display" as area 6 data? If so, then the point is needed.
> > Adolfo
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ed Jones
> > Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2013 9:25 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [PCCTG1] cm and csr
> > Beth
> > You are correct. The period is part of the "point-space-dash-space"
> prescribed punctuation that precedes the series area (area 6) in the
> description. Since there is no area 6 in these circumstances, there is no
> preceding prescribed punctuation, and hence no period.
> > The dash can be supplied by program on output, and theoretically--
> since RDA removes the period that formerly followed "cm" under AACR2--
> the whole "point-space-dash could have been supplied by program on
> records coded $e rda, obviating the need for that part of your chart.
> Maybe some day...
> > Ed
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > On Aug 24, 2013, at 8:11, "Beth Thornton" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >> Hi everybody,
> >> I'm working on a little chart which may or may not become part of
> module 21. Well actually I have been working on a chart and today I sat
> down to revise some cataloging I did. It was a bare-bones record so I
> converted to RDA. And upon looking again I realized that I forgot to
> delete the period after cm. No series statement.
> >> So I went back to my chart to add that, because there are, maybe,
> people like me, who might need a reminder. I know that if there is a series
> statement, then the period is retained because it's isbd punctuation.
> >> What if it's a CSR record and the series on the piece is the same as the
> authorized form and so is only given in an 8xx field?
> >> My feeling is that in that case there is no series statement in the
> record, and therefore no period.
> >> Correct? Way off base?
> >> Long-windedly yours,
> >> Beth
> >> UGA
> >> --
> >> Beth Thornton