On rare occasions, I actually want to transcribe text verbatim in a 670, and when I do that, I use quotation marks to show that it is a verbatim transcription.  But anything in a 670 $b that is not in quotes is, by implication, the essence of the information gleaned from the resource, and is not necessarily (but yet still could be) a direct transcription.  At least, that is my understanding from the training that I have received.


The Wikipedia example under RDA cited below appears to me as a great example of an ideal way of putting information into the 670:  copy and paste pieces of information from an electronic source.  There is no prohibition against modifying the data into another form, but—unless the result is an increase in clarity—the only thing being accomplished is putting in extra work.


Kevin M. Randall

Principal Serials Cataloger

Northwestern University Libraries

Northwestern University


[log in to unmask]



Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wilson, Pete
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 2:51 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] recording date of birth in field 670 of name authority records


It seems like all we really need to do in the 670 $b is give the facts clearly and unambiguously.  We aren’t transcribing text—we’re getting and giving information.  It may be pretty clear to most that the date 1954-08-03 (from the example) means August 3 rather than March 8, but I’d spell that out just to make sure.  I see no value in attempting to record the exact text as found.


Pete Wilson

Vanderbilt University


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 2:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] recording date of birth in field 670 of name authority records


Dear PCCLIST readers,


Thanks to Mark Ehlert and John Hostage for their responses (my apologies for confusion over EDTF and ISO 8601).   And for mentioning RDA 8.12 Source Data Found, whose LCC-PC PS refers to DCM Z1 670.  I think the instruction there should apply to dates in subfield a but not in subfield b.  Here's why.  


There is no question about instructions to record the date on which data is found in a particular source, in subfield a of field 670: Month spelled out, followed by day and year.  But in subfield b, where one records the data found, the intention of RDA is to record the data as found rather than adjust it to the Month, day, year format.  You do that in field 046, but not in field 670. has an example which illustrates this point.  The birth and death dates were found to be in YYYY-MM-DD format:


Catalogue Bn-Opale plus, via WWW, March 11, 2009. Authorized access point: Colette (1873–1954); variant access points: Willy, Colette (1873–1954); Colette, Gabrielle Sidonie (1873–1954); Colette, Sidonie Gabrielle (1873–1954); nationality: France; language: French; gender: female; roles: author, performer; birth date: 1873–01–28; death date: 1954–08–03


RDA Recording Source Consulted also has an example demonstrating that the intent of RDA was not to rearrange a date statement:


Wikipedia, viewed December 2, 2007 (Howard Fast; Howard Melvin Fast (11 November 1914, New York City–12 March 2003, Old Greenwich, Connecticut) was a Jewish American novelist and television writer, who wrote also under the pen names E.V. Cunningham and Walter Ericson)


Sincerely - Ian 


Ian Fairclough

Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian

George Mason University


[log in to unmask]