Recording Numbering for a Series (2.12.9.3)

6JSC/CCC/18/rev
5 August 2015

Recording Numbering for a Series (2.12.9.3)

 

Submitted by Bill Leonard, Canadian Committee on Cataloguing Representative

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Recording Numbering for a Series (2.12.9.3)

  1. Robert L. Maxwell says:

    I have to say I have never found this confusing nor have I ever had any cataloger ask me about this. As far as I can tell there is no difference at all in the results of application of either 2.6.1.4 or 2.12.9.3–in either case you transcribe the caption as found and record the numeral following 1.8. So there’s actually no issue as far as I can see for the principle of common usage or practice. However, I see no problem with regularizing the language so the instruction in both places reads the same. On the assessment of whether there will be an impact on the examples, if there *is* an impact on the examples then there’s something wrong with the revision, because as far as I can tell the revision wasn’t meant to change the results, just clarify the instruction.

  2. John Myers says:

    Concur with Bob’s assessment. I will note additionally though that the last paragraph flips the current “transcribe” to “record”: language which is/will be impacted by Kathy’s work analyzing the use of record and transcribe.

    • John Myers says:

      I will add that CCC _completely_ misrepresents the situation in their justification paragraph when they state “series numbers … are transcribed.” This is not the case at all: RDA merely uses alternate wording to achieve the same end of applying 1.8 in conjunction with 1.7.

    • Kathy Glennan says:

      I must say, I prefer “transcribe” to “record as it appears” — since that’s what “transcribe” means!

  3. Robert Bratton says:

    I concur — the language of these two instructions should be consistent.

  4. Matthew Haugen says:

    I agree with all of the above.

Leave a Reply