Categories
Uncategorized

Histoire de la virilité / sous la direction de Alain Corbin, Jean-Jacques Courtine, Georges Vigarello. (OCLC #759002101)

We bought only the third volume of a three-volume set. Though there is an individual record for this volume in OCLC, it is lower encoding level than the set record, and I didn’t feel there was much to be gained by cataloging/classifying this volume separately from the rest of the set.

I used the set record for our holdings/catalog, but specified which volumes we owned in our mfhd record:

852 0_ ‡b yl,4 ‡h HQ1090 ‡i .H57 2011
866 41 ‡a v.3
Categories
Uncategorized

日本の村ー須恵村 / ジョン・F.エンブリー著 ; 植村元覚訳 = Suye mura : a Japanese village / by John F. Embree. (OCLC #881293935)

The translator of this book died in 1997, but this is not reflected in the authorized access point:

    Uemura, Motokaku, 1916-

This is not unusual. RDA 9.19.1.3 says about adding dates to access points:

    Add the date of birth and/or date of death if needed to
    distinguish one access point from another.

LC-PCC practice for new authority records is to add a date of birth and/or date of death to new authority records, even if not needed to distinguish between access points, but not necessarily to add them to existing records (though the option is there).

The VIAF cluster shows that some vocabularies (Japan’s National Diet Library, ISNI) have added the death date. When our catalogs have more of a “things not strings” model and store URIs for access points (rather than the full text of the authorized access point), such changes will be less costly to make.

Categories
Uncategorized

Annual report of Walker D. Hines, Director General of Railroads, 1919. Northwestern Region / R.H. Aishton, regional director. (OCLC #752789209)

Even adopting RDA’s “take what you see” attitude, I had a hard time determining who the author of this document was: R.H. Aishton? Walker D. Hines?

There are records for many similar documents in OCLC, all “Annual report of Walker D. Hines” from various regions and departments with their own directors, and each with “United States Railroad Administration” as the main entry. I stuck with this pattern, putting the administration in a 110, and with no access point for Walker D. Hines; I could not identify a role for him, other than the named representative of that body. I put the regional director in a 700 as a “compiler” of the document’s data.

Categories
Uncategorized

La inmutabilidad divina en el contexto de la idea de Dios de la Patrística incipiente / Ana Carrasco Romero. (OCLC #52599176)

RDA 7.9.1.3 details which elements should be recorded when cataloging a dissertation or thesis (degree, institution, year) but does not specify MARC fields or punctuation.

The LC-PCC PS for that rule gives a preference for recording these elements in separate subfields of 502, with no surrounding punctuation:

502 __ ǂb Ph. D. ǂc University of Toronto ǂd 1974

It also says not to routinely convert such notes from AACR2-style, so I left this one as is when upgrading the record:

502 __ ǂa Thesis (doctoral)--Pontificia universitas sanctae crucis,
  1995.
Categories
Uncategorized

Quantitative remote sensing in thermal infrared : theory and applications / Huajun Tang, Zho-Liang Li. (OCLC #861323363)

Authority records for series include the library’s practice on whether the series should be ‘traced’; that is, should records for titles in the series include an authorized access point for the series? In MARC, these appear as an 8XX, for example:

    830 _0 ǂa Springer remote sensing/photogrammetry.

The decision to trace would appear as t:

    645 ǂa __ t ǂ5 YOUNG

The decision not to trace would appear as n:

    645 ǂa __ n ǂ5 YOUNG
Categories
Uncategorized

Le tsunami numérique : éducation, tout va changer! Êtes-vous prêts? / Emmanuel Davidenkoff. (OCLC #880358053)

The LC-PCC PS for RDA 25.1.1.13 (describing the formatting for contents notes) says to omit chapter and section numbering in that note. This would have been a bit odd in this book, whose first few chapters are:

  • 1. Machines versus profs, la guerre des mondes
  • 2. MOOC story
  • 3… D

Chapter 3 is about 3D printers, so the chapter heading is formatted slightly differently, with the chapter title including the chapter number.

To keep things simple and clear, I mostly followed the PS but recorded the odd chapter title as it was likely intended:

505 0_ ǂa Machines versus profs, la guerre des mondes -- MOOC
  story -- 3... D -- Design or decline -- Coopération versus
  sélection -- Le marché mondial des talents -- Imagine -- L'école
  et le syndrome Kodak -- Chronique d'une privatisation annoncée --
  L'innovation, un arte povera -- Du marché scolaire à la
  marchandisation de l'école.
Categories
Uncategorized

Erfahrungen mit der Digitalisierung von rastermässig erfassten Linienstrukturen / Thomas Kreifelts … [et al.]. (OCLC #2794543)

If a set of books is part of an analyzed series that is classed together, the call number in the bib record for the set might be recorded in a format like:

    QA1 ǂb .G344 no. 30, etc.

That is, both volumes have a call number that starts QA1 .G344, but have enumeration based on their location in the series:

    QA1 .G344 no. 30
    QA1 .G344 no. 37

In our collection, we classify this particular series separately, so the call numbers for the two volumes in the set actually ended up as:

    GA102.4.E4 E73 1974 v.1
    GA102.4.E4 E73 1974 v.2
Categories
Uncategorized

Yield gains in major U.S. field crops / Stephen Smith, Brian Diers, James Specht, and Brett Carver, editors. (OCLC #880168370)

A book containing multiple chapters may be considered a collection of separate works, with a whole-part or “contains” relationship. The rules for describing this relationship in RDA are in Chapter 25, Related Works. In general this can be recorded with a statement like:

Contains: Barley -- Cotton -- Cool-season forages.

As we are encoding the record in MARC, the “Contains:” phrase is not needed; it is specified by the first indicator of the 505. More details can be found in the LC-PCC PS for RDA 25.1.1.3.

Though recording this relationship is not required, I did not find doing so for this book burdensome, and the resulting statement was dense with helpful keywords:

505 0_ ǂa Barley -- Cotton -- Cool-season forages -- Lettuce
  and spinach -- Edible grain legumes -- Maize -- Peanut -- Potato
  -- Rangeland and warm-season forage grasses -- Rice -- Sorghum --
  Soybean -- Sugarbeet -- Sugarcane -- Sunflower -- Wheat.
Categories
Uncategorized

Los reyes del Grial / Margarita Torres Sevilla, José Miguel Ortega del Río ; edición de María Robledano. (OCLC #878689024)

Only the first statement of responsibility is core in RDA, so we could have chosen to omit “edición de María Robledano”.

A statement of responsibility listing more than one person (such as “Margarita Torres Sevilla, José Miguel Ortega del Río”) is recorded as a single statement. There is an optional omission rule which says that if a statement includes more than three (!) people, you may omit some of them and record a summarized version, such as:

edited by Bob Smith, Jon Jones [and two others]

Both LC-PCC PS and NLA PS say to generally not omit names.

When recording relationships between people and resources (for example, via main or added entries in a MARC record), only the first creator (or someone used to create the AAP) is required; I chose to record the relationship for the second creator (in a 700) as well.

Categories
Uncategorized

Map worlds : a history of women in cartography / Will C. van den Hoonaard. (OCLC #830352925)

This book on our shelf had the same call number as this book on a very different topic:

Sea monsters on medieval and Renaissance maps / Chet Van Duzer. (OCLC #844705228)

Both were classed under GA203, a general special class number (under Cartography–History) which is for special aspects of the subject as a whole which don’t have their own place in the classification. I moved the sea monsters book to GA781 (Cartography, European maps) which was more specific; the sea monsters aspect is still accessible via subject headings.

No new “general special” numbers are being established, and there are generally only narrow ways these classifications should be used (amorphous works, too new subjects). However, GA203 has a scope note specifying that it should be used for “cartographical sources, value of maps in boundary disputes, popes as geographers.” The topic “women cartographers” seemed similar in scope, and I couldn’t find a more specific appropriate classification, so I left it as general special.