JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CIG-E-FORUM Archives


CIG-E-FORUM Archives

CIG-E-FORUM Archives


CIG-E-FORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CIG-E-FORUM Home

CIG-E-FORUM Home

CIG-E-FORUM  October 2012

CIG-E-FORUM October 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Record 9

From:

"C.J. Carty" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

C.J. Carty

Date:

Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:16:24 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (45 lines)

We shelve separately too but would still include the information in the 
record 300 $e etc.

On Oct 25 2012, Clifford, Katrina M wrote:

> It's sort of a hypothetical for me anyway as we'd always shelve the 
> CD-ROM separately with its own record but good to think about for the odd 
> occasions with kits etc...
>
>Katrina
>
> -----Original Message----- From: CIG E-Forum 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of C.J. Carty Sent: 25 
> October 2012 14:29 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: 
> [CIG-E-FORUM] Record 9
>
> I'm seeing a variation and also some questions about adding the 
> dimensions of the CD-ROM. I note in the BL workflow that their policy is 
> not to record dimensions of accompanying material.
>
> I did include it, going by 3.1.4 to include details of each carrier type 
> and then applying the LC-PCC PS for 3.5.1.4.4 which says to give inches 
> for discs. Actually I dislike this current practice, maybe now is the 
> time to rethink it (though it's hard to go against LC/PCC practice 
> because it will cause problems then with downloaded records being in 
> inches).
>
> I abbreviated the "inches" to "in." because 3.5.1.3 on dimensions points 
> you to appendix B.5.1 and from there to App.B.7 which says that you can 
> abbreviate inches to in. This seems so illogical though, when we've 
> learned that RDA means no more abbreviations. We already have the 
> slightly odd situation of "cm" becuase it's technically not an 
> abbreviation but an SI. Maybe I'm edging towards thinking we either move 
> to metric dimensions for everything or we omit dimensions of accompanying 
> material following BL practice.
>
>Celine
>

-- 
CÚline Carty
English Cataloguing
Cambridge University Library
Cambridge CB3 9DR

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
February 2016
December 2015
September 2015
May 2015
April 2015
November 2014
July 2014
May 2014
February 2014
January 2014
October 2013
August 2013
June 2013
April 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
September 2011
May 2011
April 2011


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager