Thank you for your questions on the RDA records. The SCT is currently evaluating what should be done with the RDA record examples. Bob Maxwell and I, current SCT co-chairs, have updated the letter accompanying the SCT RDA Record Examples to clarify the situation. Our music and AV expert, Cate Gerhart, has volunteered to review the music and AV records, so those records will be updated in the next few weeks, with revision dates posted on each revised record. Cate also offers the following guidance regarding some of the questions you raised:
1. First, the only time the date the film was originally made can go in the second Dtst position is when there is no additional materials on the disc. Once you get trailers, interviews with cast, documentaries on how the film was made, and other such specials, you need to put the date the film was made in the 046 $k, because the dates in the date fixed field apply to the entire manifestation.
The DtSt code will depend on what dates are in the date field based on the decision made above. It will sometimes by p or t.
Of course, this means that the original film date is in multiple places, so often catalogers are always putting it in the 046 even if it is also in the second date spot. I think this is a good idea.
2. There is ongoing discussion about how the 033 and 046 relate and I think that decision needs to be made by the MARC Advisory Committee and the MARC office rather than by this group since it really isn't clear in the MARC documentation. If someone in PCC would like to help figure this out with me, that would be great. It really is a sticky problem.
University of Washington Libraries
Head of Cataloging
New York University Law School Library
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
Thanks for your message about the RDA records at http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/SCT%20RDA%20Records%20TG/index.html -- it is good so see that you have analyzed the records so thoroughly.
The RDA records were collected by a task group under the auspices of the PCC Standing Committee on Training (SCT) back in 2011, when RDA was still being implemented by the PCC. That is not an excuse for any errors you might find in the records, but is a comment on the newness of RDA when they were collected and vetted.
I was one of the SCT co-chairs at the time.
The records are due for evaluation now that RDA has become a part of everyone’s workflow. I will let the SCT know and will send them your specific questions as well.
Acting Coordinator, NACO and SACO Programs
Cooperative Programs Section
Cooperative and Instructional Programs Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20540-4230
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Laurel Nadell
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 6:55 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] If anyone has time to answer a novice's question
I am making my first foray into RDA records. I have been reading and looking at samples. The PCC sample for Projected Medium Records found at http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/SCT%20RDA%20Records%20TG/index.html
I am unclear about the 046k plus some other dates.
On record 1
I don't even know where the 046$k2000 comes from, as i do not see anything which relates back to 2000.
Why would someone choose to include both a 380 and a 655. Both which refer to television program.
>>GP. I think 046 $k should be $k 2009 (probably the “2000” it was a typo introduced at some point). Re: 380 and 655 in the same record: it’s cataloger judgment. But the 380 is probably better in work or expression records, which currently are NARs or SARs, rather than bib. records.
I assume refers to an event which took place in 1996 and has a note explaining such event in 518. Why then, is that event not placed in the 033 instead? Yes I do see a note for originally produced in 1996, then why not include that information in a 264? Why no 1996 in Dtst?
GP: Isn’t 033 optional, but it could have been used as well.
Why is 2009,2009 the Dtst?
What I have read about the 046, is a date that doesn't go anywhere else. It seems to me that 046 is being used for an original production but what not use the 264(p) or (c)
In general I have been advised to use the p in the Dtst rather than the t which is in the examples.
I appreciate any feedback.
Amy Laurel Nadell
Access Educational Media