Russian printing to 1917 : [a catalogue of an exhibition in the University Library, Cambridge, 22 April to 29 June 1974]. (OCLC #2137460)

In standards prior to RDA, the publisher could be recorded in the shortest recognizable form. In the record for this piece (entered into OCLC in 1976), the creator and the publisher were recognized to be the same body, so the publisher was recorded very briefly as “The Library”, as it could be recognized from earlier on the card:

110 2_ ǂa Cambridge University Library.
245 10 ǂa Russian printing to 1917 : ǂb [a catalogue of
    an exhibition in the University Library, Cambridge,
    22 April to 29 June 1974].
260  [Cambridge] : ǂb [The Library], ǂc 1974.

Creators of this standard had no idea that this data would eventually all be uncoupled and the publisher separately indexed in a way that would make all similar “The Library”’s the same. A search for this publisher (or at least, a publisher described in this brief way) in my own catalog produced many different libraries, including the National Library of Singapore, the Enoch Pratt Free Library, and the Charles C. Miller Memorial Apicultural Library.


I︠A︡zykovai︠a︡ situat︠s︡ii︠a︡ Kievskoĭ Rusi i ee znachenie dli︠a︡ istorii russkogo literaturnogo i︠a︡zyka : [doklad na IX Mezhdunarodnom sʺezde slavistov, Kiev, 1983 g.] / B.A. Uspenskiĭ. (OCLC #10876369)

When copy cataloging, recall that pre-RDA records may abbreviate various words which you may not recognize if they are in an unfamiliar language. For example, where this piece says “Издательство” (Izdatelʹstvo, “publishing house”), the record I found abbreviated it as Izd-vo:

260 __ ǂa Moskva : ǂb Izd-vo Moskovskogo universiteta, ǂc 1983.

This makes such words not ideal for searching, and you may have to look closely to decide if the record you found matches the piece in hand.


Recaída : 2013-2014 / Alberto Quintana. (OCLC #884794517)

RDA says to transcribe an edition statement as it appears on the source of information, which in this case is: 1a edición

I often hear that “there are no abbreviations in RDA” but this is not quite true. This abbreviation is appropriate, because that is how it appears on the piece; it should not be spelled out as “Primera edición”, but it should not be abbreviated further to “1a ed.” either.

Cataloged in a MARC record using ISBD punctuation, this statement would appear as:

250 __ ǂa 1a edición.

Learn 2D game development with C# / Jebediah Pavleas, Jack Keng-Wei Chang, Kelvin Sung, Robert Zhu. (OCLC #868648400)

This title has two abbreviations which can be recorded in a variant title, according to the LC-PCC PS for RDA

246 3_ ǂa Learn two-dimensional game development with C sharp

It may be bit excessive, as I don’t know how many budding game developers would search our catalog for “two-dimensional game development”. Also, though C# is not in the first five words of the title (the cut-off in the LC-PCC PS), C Sharp is an alternate spelling of C# and might be searched for by a patron who had only heard of the language, but not seen its name written.