Additions and Revisions to RDA 2.15.3, Plate Number for Music

RSC/MusicWG/2
21 July 2016

Additions and Revisions to RDA 2.15.3, Plate Number for Music

 

Submitted: Damian Iseminger, Chair, RSC Music Working Group

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Additions and Revisions to RDA 2.15.3, Plate Number for Music

  1. Kathy Glennan says:

    Revision to 2.15.3.1:

    I generally support this revision, but there’s a problem in the rewording of the 2nd sentence in the 2nd paragraph: “It sometimes also includes…”

    The problem is in interpreting the use of “also”. The number corresponding to the number of pages may or may not include the things laid out in the 1st sentence (initials, abbreviations, or words identifying a publisher).

    The phrasing of this whole paragraph could be improved, perhaps as follows:

    “A plate number may include initials, abbreviations, or words identifying a publisher. It may include a number corresponding to the total number of pages or plates, or a number corresponding to an individual page or plate.”

    Notes:
    * I used “may include” instead of “sometimes includes”, since that phrase currently occurs in 2.6.7.1, 2.6.9.1, and 6.16.1.1.
    * I switched to “pages or plates” because that is the order currently in 2.15.3.1 and in 3.4.5.9. In my experience, most “plate numbers” that appear in scores are not actually on “plates” anymore.
    * The use of the term “plate” here also does not correspond to the RDA Glossary definition of “plate” — it’s more about the production process (engraving a plate or set of plates) to create the publication. However, “plate number” associated with notated music is definitely a term in common usage.

    • Kathy Glennan says:

      I’m also wondering about the 2nd condition in that paragraph (numbering corresponding to an individual plate or page). I really would have liked to see an example about this here. Although I have over three decades of music cataloging experience to draw on, I can’t think of (or find) an example of this type of plate numbering offhand. When this occurs, is there a separate page number on the page as well?

      • Kathy Glennan says:

        Bottom line: is this clause really needed? (Corollary: is the 2nd alternative needed?)

        • Diane Napert says:

          I thought about conflating the two alternatives, but then it is probably too wordy
          I looked for an example of the second alternative on Mickey’s site (music cataloging at Yale), but didn’t see any
          There are examples of the first alternative, but Kathy’s are good as well

    • Kathy Glennan says:

      Potential examples for 1st alternative:

      OCLC #3857224
      Autumn serenade : a modern composition for the piano / by Peter De Rose ; [arranged by D. Savino].
      Plate number at bottom of each page: SH 2970-7.
      Number of pages: 7.
      Plate number recorded per Alternative: SH 2970.

      OCLC #6361593
      Mill doors / Norman Dello Joio.
      Plate number at bottom of each page: 30349-3.
      Pages numbered: 3-5 (actual number of pages of music: 3).
      Plate number recorded per Alternative: 30349.

      • Robert L. Maxwell says:

        Yes, we definitely need some examples like this. The examples in the proposal don’t appear to show the total number of pages, and so the alternatives will be very mysterious. The examples need to include examples exemplifying a plate number with total number of pages.

    • Kathy Glennan says:

      Note that although the WG recommended changing the multiple identifier examples in 2.15.3.3, they did not provide markup for this change. We should just consider that comment a recommendation to the Examples Editor.

      • Diane Napert says:

        Do these generally flow in numerical order? Would the first sentence in paragraph 5 list 2.15.2.3 (page 2) then 2.15.3.3

        • Kathy Glennan says:

          I think I would have listed them in numerical order.

          However, since that comment is addressed to the RSC Examples Editor, I don’t believe that the ALA response needs to include a mention of this.

    • Tina Shrader says:

      I like Kathy’s suggested wording here. It’s less cluttered and flows better, I think.

    • Diane Napert says:

      I like the consistency with “may include” and “pages or plates” Probably clearer without “also” Hard to get the point across that it can be a mix of the elements listed

  2. Mary Huismann says:

    Passing along a question from the music community: When recording a number corresponding to an individual plate or page would the plate number be expressed as a range? Such as 8329-1–8329-26? Or should this reflect the standard practice in RDA of providing each identifier individually? 8329-1 8329-2 etc. Is there a concern that the alternative could accommodate too great a range of conflicting practice?

Leave a Reply