Print

Print


 I'm back again.

Relationship designators

The designators in Appendix I are intended to be used with persons, families or corporate bodies unless it is clear from the scope that they are limited to a specific entity.  The usage may appear awkward, but we are talking about controlled terms not natural language.

It is pretty much guaranteed that there are omissions.  With regard to what would be approporiate for conferences considered to be creators, I don't think any further refinement is needed.  

I perceive an ambiguity between the scope of corporate bodies as creators responsible for "originating, issuing, or causing to be issued" works as specified by 19.2.1.1.1 a-g) and the limitation of issuing body to I.2.2.
BL is currently discussing this with JSC.

Edition statements

"Designation of Edition Integral to Title Proper, Etc.
If a designation of edition is an integral part of the title proper, other title information, or statement of responsibility, or if it is grammatically linked to any of these, record it as such and do not record a further designation of edition."

Remember that this is just description, the expression is identified by additions to the title of the work.  

Alan


-----Original Message-----
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CIG-E-FORUM automatic digest system
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:55
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Oct 2012 - Special issue (#2012-40)

There are 17 messages totaling 10108 lines in this issue.

Topics in this special issue:

  1. Record 7 (3)
  2. Sharing record 8 (2)
  3. Record 8 (6)
  4. <No subject given> (2)
  5. sharing record 8
  6. Record no. 8
  7. Queries on record 8
  8. Record 8 Warwick - discussion

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:45:35 +0000
From:    "Slough, Nick" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Record 7

It looks to me as though you are meant to use 'author', 'compiler' etc as appropriate with corporate bodies as well as persons - though this would be an odd way to put it in ordinary language & that's perhaps why people avoid it?

Nick Slough
Assistant Librarian
Bibliographical Services Section
City of London Libraries, Archives and Guildhall Art Gallery Guildhall Library Aldermanbury London EC2V 7HH
Tel: 020 7332 1093
Email: [log in to unmask]
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/libraries

Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/citybibs>
Read our blog<http://citybibs.wordpress.com/>

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jackie Johnson (Library Services)
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:41
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Record 7

We also had this problem and wondered if one hadn't been devised yet! We did think the right area was Appendix L, but it looked as if maybe the pertinent area was under development. Have we missed something here??


Jackie Johnson
Metadata Coordinator
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham
B15 2TT
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
0121-414-2767

Please note I do not work Mondays
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Clifford, Katrina M
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Record 7

I spent about 20 minutes looking at the relationship designators last night and couldn't find one that comfortably fitted.... I felt it should have one but couldn't think what

Katrina

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Slough, Nick
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:33
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Record 7

Does anyone think the entry for the Conference needs a relationship designator?  And if so what?  I seem to have seen quite a lot of example records from various sources where corporate bodies have not been given RDs when persons have.  Is that part of RDA?

Nick Slough
Assistant Librarian
Bibliographical Services Section
City of London Libraries, Archives and Guildhall Art Gallery Guildhall Library Aldermanbury London EC2V 7HH
Tel: 020 7332 1093
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/libraries<http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/libraries>

Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/citybibs>
Read our blog<http://citybibs.wordpress.com/>




THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail. Opinions, advice or facts included in this message are given without any warranties or intention to enter into a contractual relationship with the City of London unless specifically indicated otherwise by agreement, letter or facsimile signed by a City of London authorised signatory. Any part of this e-mail which is purely personal in nature is not authorised by the City of London. All e-mail through the City of London's gateway is potentially the subject of monitoring. All liability for errors and viruses is excluded. Please note that in so far as the City of London falls within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, it may need to disclose this e-mail. Website: http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email Security System.


THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution or other dissemination or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail. Opinions, advice or facts included in this message are given without any warranties or intention to enter into a contractual relationship with the City of London unless specifically indicated otherwise by agreement, letter or facsimile signed by a City of London authorised signatory. Any part of this e-mail which is purely personal in nature is not authorised by the City of London. All e-mail through the City of London's gateway is potentially the subject of monitoring. All liability for errors and viruses is excluded. Please note that in so far as the City of London falls within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, it may need to disclose this e-mail. Website: http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk 

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:46:14 +0100
From:    Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Sharing record 8

Hi everyone

 

Please keep the interesting discussions on record 7 going.  

And let's also start sharing record 8 before we break for lunch

 

Helen 

 

Helen Williams

Assistant Librarian, Bibliographic Services

 

LSE Library Services

The London School of Economics and Political Science

10 Portugal Street

London WC2A 2HD

 

[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 

020 7955 7234

 


Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communica

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:46:54 +0100
From:    "Jackie Johnson (Library Services)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record 8

Folks here's our record 8


Jackie Johnson
Metadata Coordinator
University of Birmingham
Edgbaston
Birmingham
B15 2TT
[log in to unmask]
0121-414-2767

Please note I do not work Mondays

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:37:31 +0100
From:    "C.J. Carty" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Record 7

Good question!

Relationship designators are not core anyway, but think the difficulty of assigned them particularly to corporate bodies has meant those of us choosing to include them for personal names have not done so for corporate bodies. I'd like to be consistent and always use but here I'm not sure what I'd use. I'm guessing "author" but maybe "issuing body", though that doesn't seem quite right either?



On Oct 25 2012, Slough, Nick wrote:

> Does anyone think the entry for the Conference needs a relationship 
> designator? And if so what? I seem to have seen quite a lot of example 
> records from various sources where corporate bodies have not been 
> given RDs when persons have. Is that part of RDA?
>
>
>Nick Slough
>Assistant Librarian
>Bibliographical Services Section
>City of London Libraries, Archives and Guildhall Art Gallery Guildhall 
>Library Aldermanbury London EC2V 7HH
>Tel: 020 7332 1093
>Email: [log in to unmask]
>www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/libraries
>
>Follow us on Twitter<https://twitter.com/citybibs>
>Read our blog<http://citybibs.wordpress.com/>
>
>
>
>
>
> THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE LEGALLY 
> PRIVILEGED. If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, 
> reproduction, copying, distribution or other dissemination or use of 
> this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
> transmission in error please notify the sender immediately and then delete this e-mail.
> Opinions, advice or facts included in this message are given without 
> any warranties or intention to enter into a contractual relationship 
> with the City of London unless specifically indicated otherwise by 
> agreement, letter or facsimile signed by a City of London authorised 
> signatory. Any part of this e-mail which is purely personal in nature 
> is not authorised by the City of London. All e-mail through the City 
> of London's gateway is potentially the subject of monitoring. All 
> liability for errors and viruses is excluded. Please note that in so 
> far as the City of London falls within the scope of the Freedom of 
> Information Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 
> 2004, it may need to disclose this e-mail. Website: 
> http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
>

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

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:48:35 +0100
From:    Bernadette Mary O'Reilly <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record 8

My questions on this one are mainly about the format of the edition/revision statements.

 

Best wishes,

Bernadette

 

Record 8. Successful enquiry answering every time.

 

Field

Ind.

Data

RDA Inst.

LDR/7

 

m

 

LDR/18

 

i

 

008/22

 

 

 

008/35-37

 

eng

 

020

 

$a9781856048118

 

040

##

$erda

 

100 

1#

$aBuckley Owen, Tim,

$d1948-

$eauthor.

 

240

10

$aSuccess at the enquiry desk

 

245

 

$aSuccessful enquiry answering every time /

$cTim Buckley Owen

 

250

 

$aSixth edition, Fully revised and updated.

 

1. I'm assuming that it is OK to extrapolate 'Sixth edition' - none of the RDA examples are very discursive.

2. I used initial capitals for both statements because they are separate statements on the resource.  RDA has a similar example ('4th ed. [new line]Roads revised') but no explanation, so this is my best guess.

 

264

#1 

$aLondon :

$bFacet Publishing,

$c2012.

 

264

#4

$c(c)2012.

 

300

##

$axiii, 156 pages :

$c24 cm.

 

336

##

$atext $2rdacontent

 

337

##

$aunmediated$ rdamedia

 

338

##

$a volume$2rdacarrier

 

500

##

$aPrevious edition: 2006.

 

 

 

No 505, because local policy is to make contents notes only for substantial works included in the resource or to clarify what is where in multipart sets.

 

 

 

 

*******************
Bernadette O'Reilly
Catalogue Support Librarian 

01865 2-77134 

Bodleian Libraries,
Osney One Building
Osney Mead
Oxford OX2 0EW.

******************* 

 

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:47:56 +0100
From:    Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: <No subject given>

Thanks Celine
That's helpful; I think I need to have a closer read of the LC-PCC PS - note to self!
Helen 

-----Original Message-----
From: C.J. Carty [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of C.J. Carty
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:42
To: Williams,HK
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM]

My reading of 19.2.1.1.1 and the associated detailed LC-PCC PS is that in this case the conference *would* be a creator (and therefore gets 111). 
I've worked through the decisions set out in the LC-PCC PS to get to that conclusion, the first bit of which (1d) says if in doubt, assume corporate body *has* issued, etc. The second bit I would say it definitely meets the requirements of 19.2.1.1.1(c) as it's the collective activity of a conference (I don't think the exact nuance of AACR2 remains here, I feel it's more clear-cut).

I'm only feeling my way here though, so none of this is more than my opinion.

On Oct 25 2012, Helen Williams wrote:

>In the MARC template I see we've got some records with the conference 
>in a 111 and 711.  19.1.1.1 details corporate body being creator, so 
>therefore 111, but I went for 711, as I wasn't sure whether the book 
>actually represented the conference or was just based on them.  Would 
>that distinction still apply in RDA?
>
>Helen
>
> 
>
>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>Clifford, Katrina M
>Sent: 25 October 2012 11:27
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM]
>
> 
>
>Ah - yes um I guess this is one where I'm again probably not 
>consistent... and I was just saying to someone the other day about 
>conferences as 'authors'....
>
> 
>
>Seems this is showing up errors in my current approach nevermind moving 
>to RDA :S
>
> 
>
>Katrina
>
> 
>
>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>Fiona Doig
>Sent: 25 October 2012 11:10
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM]
>
> 
>
>Record 7 attached.  I've put the conference in as Creator following 
>Rule
>19.2.1.1.1 (c) works that report the collective activity of a 
>conference, but wasn't totally sure about that.  Any comments?
>
> 
>
>Fiona L.M. Doig
>
>(Assistant Librarian - Acquisitions, Cataloguing & Processing)
>
>Main Library
>
>Library & Learning Centre
>
>University of Dundee
>
>DD1 4HN
>
>Tel: 01382 384088
>
> 
>
>
>The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096 
>This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email 
>Security System.
>
>
>This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email 
>Security System.
>
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic 
> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

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


Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:50:49 +0100
From:    Wendy Taylor <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record 8

Wendy (RNIB)

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:51:04 +0100
From:    Aline Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: sharing record 8

Number 8!
Aline
 
Aline Robertson
Documentation and Quality Control Librarian Collections Team Dunfermline Carnegie Library
08451 555555
Ext: 473071

 

Follow Fife libraries on Facebook 

www.facebook.com/fifelibrariesmuseums
 
LAMA is part of the Fife Cultural Trust a Company limited by guarantee ( incorporated in Scotland) Company Number: SC415704 A Scottish charity
: charity number SC043442
"Think Green" and only print this email if absolutely necessary 


**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and should not be disclosed to any other party. 
If you have received this email in error please notify your system manager and the sender of this message.

This email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses but no guarantee is given that this e-mail message and any attachments are free from viruses.

Fife Council reserves the right to monitor the content of all incoming and outgoing email.

Fife Council
************************************************

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:51:41 +0000
From:    Tony Whitehurst <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record 8


------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:51:57 +0000
From:    "Reynolds, Toby" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record no. 8

My attempt at record 8.

Toby

Toby Reynolds
Cataloguer
UCL Library Services
University College London
Gower Street
London WC1E 6BT

Tel: +44 (0)20 7679 2204 (Internal Ext: 32204)

E-mail: [log in to unmask]

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:42:24 +0100
From:    "C.J. Carty" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: <No subject given>

My reading of 19.2.1.1.1 and the associated detailed LC-PCC PS is that in this case the conference *would* be a creator (and therefore gets 111). 
I've worked through the decisions set out in the LC-PCC PS to get to that conclusion, the first bit of which (1d) says if in doubt, assume corporate body *has* issued, etc. The second bit I would say it definitely meets the requirements of 19.2.1.1.1(c) as it's the collective activity of a conference (I don't think the exact nuance of AACR2 remains here, I feel it's more clear-cut).

I'm only feeling my way here though, so none of this is more than my opinion.

On Oct 25 2012, Helen Williams wrote:

>In the MARC template I see we've got some records with the conference 
>in a 111 and 711.  19.1.1.1 details corporate body being creator, so 
>therefore 111, but I went for 711, as I wasn't sure whether the book 
>actually represented the conference or was just based on them.  Would 
>that distinction still apply in RDA?
>
>Helen
>
> 
>
>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>Clifford, Katrina M
>Sent: 25 October 2012 11:27
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM]
>
> 
>
>Ah - yes um I guess this is one where I'm again probably not 
>consistent... and I was just saying to someone the other day about 
>conferences as 'authors'....
>
> 
>
>Seems this is showing up errors in my current approach nevermind moving 
>to RDA :S
>
> 
>
>Katrina
>
> 
>
>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>Fiona Doig
>Sent: 25 October 2012 11:10
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM]
>
> 
>
>Record 7 attached.  I've put the conference in as Creator following 
>Rule
>19.2.1.1.1 (c) works that report the collective activity of a 
>conference, but wasn't totally sure about that.  Any comments?
>
> 
>
>Fiona L.M. Doig
>
>(Assistant Librarian - Acquisitions, Cataloguing & Processing)
>
>Main Library
>
>Library & Learning Centre
>
>University of Dundee
>
>DD1 4HN
>
>Tel: 01382 384088
>
> 
>
>
>The University of Dundee is a registered Scottish Charity, No: SC015096 
>This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email 
>Security System.
>
>
>This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email 
>Security System.
>
>
> Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic 
> communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

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

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:52:17 +0100
From:    "Clifford, Katrina M" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Queries on record 8

Again I did put these on the bottom of the record but I think forgot them in the body of the email


Did we ever come to a conclusion on recording MPG books?

Do I need/should I record dates of previous editions - normally I would put a note with 'Previous edition published XXXX'.

Thanks

Katrina

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:53:06 +0000
From:    Ian Letts <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Record 8

Attempt at record 8 attached.

Ian Letts
Senate House Library
University of London
Senate House
Malet St
London WC1E 7HU

Tel : 020 7862 8455

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>



------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:43:22 +0100
From:    "C.J. Carty" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Record 7

On Oct 25 2012, Jackie Johnson (Library Services) wrote:

> We also had this problem and wondered if one hadn't been devised yet! 
> We did think the right area was Appendix L, but it looked as if maybe 
> the pertinent area was under development. Have we missed something here??

I have put the conference as creator (111) and therefore would be looking for a relationship designator from Appendix I.
--
CÚline Carty
English Cataloguing
Cambridge University Library
Cambridge CB3 9DR

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:53:56 +0100
From:    Helen Doyle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Record 8

No. 8.

Issues:
1) is that edition statement a subtitle?? (I have lots of notes going back-and-forth on this!)
2) I went with previous editions being related expressions - ?

HelenD.



Helen Doyle
Assistant Librarian
 
Royal Academy of Dance
36 Battersea Square
London
SW11 3RA
0207 326 8032


>>> Wendy Taylor <[log in to unmask]> 10/25/2012 11:50 am >>>
Wendy (RNIB)

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:54:24 +0000
From:    "Lee, Deborah" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Sharing record 8

My attempt at record 8.  I did some serious pondering on this one over how to treat the former editions.  Not entirely happy with what I came up with ...

Debbie

Deborah Lee
Senior cataloguer
Book Library
Courtauld Institute of Art
Somerset House
Strand
London WC2R 0RN

Telephone: 020 7848 2905
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Now on at The Courtauld Gallery:

Peter Lely: A Lyrical Vision
11 October 2012 - 13 January 2013

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Helen Williams
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:46
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Sharing record 8

Hi everyone

Please keep the interesting discussions on record 7 going.
And let's also start sharing record 8 before we break for lunch

Helen

Helen Williams
Assistant Librarian, Bibliographic Services

LSE Library Services
The London School of Economics and Political Science 10 Portugal Street London WC2A 2HD

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
020 7955 7234


Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

The Courtauld Institute of Art is a company limited by guarantee (registered in England and Wales, number 04464432) and an exempt charity. SCT Enterprises Limited is a limited company (registered in England and Wales, number 3137515). Their registered offices are at Somerset House, Strand, London WC2R 0RN. The sale of items related to The Courtauld Gallery and its collections is managed by SCT Enterprises Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Courtauld Institute of Art.
This e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any unauthorised dissemination or copying of this e-mail or its attachments and any reliance on or use or disclosure of any information contained in them is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify us by return of e-mail [or by telephone +44 (0) 20 7848 1273] and then delete it from your system.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message has been delivered safely and archived online by Mimecast.
For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date:    Thu, 25 Oct 2012 11:54:04 +0100
From:    Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Record 8 Warwick - discussion

I went for the previous 6th edition as a related expression as well.  I think I did that because 26.1.1.1 says (eg a revised version).

Helen 

 

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Peaden, William
Sent: 25 October 2012 11:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Record 8 Warwick

 

Hi all, 

 

 Issues:

1.	Is the previous 6th edition a related work or expression. This
is the revised edition of the 6th edition. We incline to expression but we are unsure.

 

Field

Ind.

Data

RDA Inst.

Leader/7

 

m

 

Leader/18

 

i

 

008/22

 

 

 

008/35-37

 

eng

 

020

 

$a9781856048118

 

040

##

$a DLC $b eng $c DLC $e rda

 

041

 

$a

$h

 

100 0# or 1#

1#

$aBuckley Owen, Tim,

$d1948-

$eauthor

 

245

 

$aSuccessful enquiry answering every time /

$cTim Buckley Owen.

 

250

 

$aSixth edition, fully revised and updated

 

264

 #1

$aLondon :

$bFacet Publishing,

$c2012.

 

264

#4

$a(c)2012

 

300

##

$axiii, 156 pages

$c24 cm.

 

336

##

$a text $2 rdacontent

 

337

##

$a unmediated $2 rdamedia

 

338

##

$a volume $2 rdacarrier

 

500

##

$a"The sixth edition of Tim Buckley Owen's classic Success at the Enquiry Desk"-Title page

 

500

##

$aPrevious edition: published as Success at the enquiry desk. 2006

 

504

##

$aIncludes bibliographical references and index.

 

700

1#

$aBuckley Owen, Tim,$d1948-$tSuccess at the enquiry desk.

 

 


Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communica

------------------------------

End of CIG-E-FORUM Digest - 25 Oct 2012 - Special issue (#2012-40)
******************************************************************