Print

Print


Not relevant to NARs created just now, but I’ll mention that in the Beta Toolkit, the string encoding scheme will be determined by policy rather than RDA itself.  So after December 15, LC-PCC can figure out how to construct an authorized access point for this situation without worrying about matching pieces of it to RDA elements.

 

                                                                                Steve McDonald

                                                                                [log in to unmask]

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Robert M. TALBOTT
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 3:48 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] NAR for a cancelled meeting?

 

I concede the point.

 

As someone who for the moment works entirely within a MARC framework, I sometimes forget that we're inexorably moving to a MARCless world and that it's all about the mapping anymore. 

 

I think it would still be a good idea to have this raised explicitly in the instructions, somewhere.

 

Cheers

 

Bob in California

 

 

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 11:31 AM Adam L Schiff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

But Bob, thinking about RDA outside of MARC, where is this $g supposed to map to an RDA element?  There is no such element.  If you think about working outside MARC and filling out each element separately, like is done in BIBFRAME and Sinopia, there is no separate place to record "Cancelled" or "Not held", etc.  We should not be including in descriptions of entities something that has not been defined.  The only place now in RDA to record this is in a note, which could be in 678 (Corporate History) or 670 (Source Consulted).

 

Although, to slightly contradict myself here, there's also currently no separate element in RDA for number of conference either.

 

Adam

 

Adam Schiff

University of Washington Libraries


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Robert M. TALBOTT <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 11:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: NAR for a cancelled meeting?

 

I think Adam raises a valid point for not including the $g in the AAP, but I'd be inclined to include it despite the launca in the instructions regarding miscellaneous information in access points.  While inessential for identification, one does have to admit that having a prominent indicator of cancelation in the AAP is a helpful thing for the end user.

 

I'd be willing to bet that one of the reasons why the inclusion of information like this is not covered by the instructions is because up until 2020, the likelihood of papers for a cancelled congress getting published as a group under the name of that conference rarely happened.  Most conferences are shifting to some online platform, but it's a possibility that some may opt for publishing the papers while cancelling the actual face-to-face element.  Perhaps this is something worth exploring and perhaps explicitly mentioning in the Tool Kit.

 

Bob in California

 

 

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 10:53 AM Adam L Schiff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Before you include subfield $g in an RDA access point for a conference, please stop and consider what RDA element would be being recorded here.  I simply don't see a way for miscellaneous information (not an RDA element) to go into an RDA access point.  Qualifiers to break a conflict with two corporate bodies with the same name are put in parentheses after the conference preferred name in subfield $a.  The only other elements recorded in an RDA access point for conferences are number, date, and location of conference.  I don't see anything in RDA that suggests something additional can go after the place in the access point, MARC format regardless.   Also, since the access point for this cancelled conference is unique, there is no need for further qualification.  The fact that the physical gathering was cancelled is irrelevant anyway, since the proceedings were created in advance, so there still was a conference that created a work.  I could get on board omitting the location in the access point, however, since there was no gathering in that place.  I think just the number and date would be sufficient, with justification for omitting the place from the access point in a 670 field.

 

Adam Schiff

 

Adam L. Schiff

Principal Cataloger

University of Washington Libraries

Box 352900

Seattle, WA 98195-2900

aschiff @ uw.edu


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Robert M. TALBOTT <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 5:41:11 AM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: NAR for a cancelled meeting?

 

Hi Murk

 

Cancellation:  That's an interesting twist, but I think that in the final wash it's irrelevant.  The congress name is a legitimate, non-fictional access point presented on the published material.  The cancellation is important still, and should be noted in the 670.

 

Individual meeting record or general record:  My understanding is that the split between the two groups of records is one of seriality: congresses that are treated as serials are usually established under general authorities, while those cataloged as monographs receive individual authorities with numbers, dates, and places teased out where possible. 

 

Subfields:  111 2\ [meeting name]. $n ([number] : $d [date] : $c [place] : $g  [miscellaneous note])

 

$g is where one would note the cancellation.  The text supplied in MARC 21 Format for Authorities under X11 is "Projected, not held," but so long as the information is concise and correctly and succinctly conveys the information you should be golden.

 

My two cents.

 

Bob

 

 

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 4:13 AM Murk Wuite <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hi,

 

One of my colleagues is cataloging the proceedings of a meeting that was cancelled, namely the 14th instance of the Dutch symposium ‘Actuele Ontwikkelingen in het Familierecht’. The cancellation came after publication of the proceedings, which happens to mention only the number of the conference (14th), not the intended date (2020) and place (Utrecht, Netherlands).

 

Normally, we make a NAR for the particular instance when cataloging proceedings, but we’re not sure whether we should do so now, and if so, how we should code 111 $n, $d and $c.

 

Perhaps it would be better to make a NAR for the general conference (only a NAR for the 13th instance currently exists), and link to that in the BIB record, without using $n, $d and $c?

 

Thanks,

 

Murk Wuite

_____

 

Murk Wuite | metadata assistant

 

University of Amsterdam Library, department of Acquisition and Metadata Services

PO Box 19185 | 1000 GD Amsterdam

Singel 425, room E0.07 | 1012 WP Amsterdam
P +31 (0)20 525 2985 | uba.uva.nl/en



--

Bob Talbott

Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

If they're too small for court, they're probably shorts.

If they're long and advanced, you're looking at pants



--

Bob Talbott

Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

If they're too small for court, they're probably shorts.

If they're long and advanced, you're looking at pants



--

Bob Talbott

Hebraica cataloger

UC Berkeley

250 Moffitt

Berkeley, CA 94720

If they're too small for court, they're probably shorts.

If they're long and advanced, you're looking at pants