Print

Print


I agree with most of that, except the last part.  That information was copied directly from the catalog of the French national library, and in that context, dates can only be YYYY-MM-DD.  On the other hand, the DCM would indicate that dates in a less formal context should not be given as 8/3/54, because that can be ambiguous.  Is there any source that would give a date as YYYY-DD-MM?  I haven't heard of one, so dates that begin with the year can be assumed to be YYYY-MM-DD, as in ISO 8601 extended format.

I also disagree that there is an instruction to give dates in 670 $a as "Month spelled out, followed by day and year"


------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI
0000 0000 4028 0917

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Wilson, Pete [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 15:51
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 8.12.1.3 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.

 

8.12.1.3 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 29.6.1.3 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

703-993-2938

[log in to unmask]