User:DeborahLeslie/Special topics: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:31, 5 January 2017

This is where I record research and practical decisions for cataloging topics and problems that aren't clear-cut.

Bibles

Constructing the authorized access point

Update: CC:DA has made a proposal to revise the RDA instructions for dates of expressions for the Bible, which almost exactly corresponds to my arguments. http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/?p=1092. This proposal is only about changing the way that the date of expression is "recorded" rather than whether or not to use it in an authorized access point. The latter would be under the purview of PCC

Use the date as part of the "authorized access point for the expression" or not?

RDA 6.30.3.2. Authorized Access Point Representing an Expression of the Bible

Construct the authorized access point representing a particular expression of the Bible or of part of the Bible by combining (in this order):

a) the authorized access point representing the work (see 6.30.1) or the part (see 6.30.2)

b) one or more of the following elements, as applicable:

i) the language of the expression (see 6.11)

ii) other distinguishing characteristic of the expression (see 6.25)

iii) the date of the expression (see 6.24).

6.24 Scope. Date of expression of a religious work is the earliest date associated with an expression of a religious work. The date of the earliest manifestation embodying the expression may be treated as the date of expression.

6.24.1.4 The Bible and Parts of the Bible. Record the year of publication of the resource.

With these instructions, RDA seems to be ignoring the expression and considering the manifestation as the the expression for purposes of constructing an authorized access point. Except ... there is no requirement to add the date. But if one does record the date, it is to be of the publication of the resource, i.e., the manifestation.

Therefore, if trying to preserve the concept of "expression" for the Bible, the best AAP for the KJV is

Bible. English. Authorized.

not

Bible. English. Authorized. 1611.

For consistency, the latter choice would then require the addition of the date of publication of each manifestation, creating a multitude of separate authorized access points. This is the case now in the LC/NACO Authority File (2014-07-16), in which there are 49 headings for the Authorized version. The first one is for the expression and is undated. The second is dated 1611 added, and the remaining 47 have dates extending from there.

There are no Policy Statements on this issue.

Tentative resolution: Do not add a date to the authorized access point for a Bible or part of a Bible, unless the date is the only distinguishing factor between two versions known by the same name (e.g., the Bishops' Bible was first published in 1568 and substantially revised in 1574), or, the cataloger cannot determine the version.

Early modern English versions

Version	Characteristic title wording	Date of first publication	Authorized access point
Tyndale	Byble : that is to say all the Holy Scripture: in whych are contayned the Olde and New Testamente / truly & purely translated into English.	1534	l English. \|s Tyndale
Coverdale	Biblia = The Bible, that is, the Holy Scripture of the Olde and New Testament / faithfully and truly translated out of Douche and Latyn in to Englishe	1535	l English. \|s Coverdale
Matthew's version	The Byble, that is to saye, all the Holye Scripture : in whiche are contayned the Olde and New Testament / truly and purely translated into Englishe, & now lately with great industry & diligence recognysed.	1537	l English. \|s Matthew's version
Great Bible	The Byble in Englyshe, that is to saye the content of all the Holy Scrypture, both of [the] Olde and Newe Testament / truly translated after the veryte of the Hebrue and Greke textes, by the dylygent studye of dyuerse excellent learned men, expert in the forsayde tonges	1539	l English. \|s Great Bible
Taverner's Bible	The most sacred Bible, whiche is the Holy Scripture : conteyning the Old and New Testament / translated into English, and newly recognised with great diligence after most faythful exemplars, by Rychard Taverner.	1539	l English. \|s Taverner
Geneva	The Bible and Holy Scriptures conteyned in the Olde and Newe Testament / translated according to the Ebrue and Greke ... ; (typical of false Amsterdam imprints): The Bible that is, the Holy Scriptures conteined in the Old and New Testament / translated according to the Ebrew and Greeke.	1560	l English. \|s Geneva
Bishops' Bible (original version)	The holie Bible.	1568	l English. \|s Bishops'. \|f 1568
Bishops' Bible (revised version)	The Holy Byble, conteynyng the olde Testament and the newe / set foorth by aucthoritie	1574	l English. \|s Bishop's. \|f 1574
King James aka Authorized	The Holy Bible, containing the Old Testament and the New / newly translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised ; by His Majesties special command.	1611	l English. \|s Authorized

Acts of Parliament

ESTC uniform title for single acts is based on Statutes of the Realm, while modern citations are based on Halsbury's Statutes, first published 1929.

Even within the ESTC, there are many variations in uniform titles, and some in choice of title (perhaps)--Anno regni vs name of act given as a caption.

1° Jac.II Stat.1 c.8 (Statutes of the Realm)

1 Jac.II.stat.1.c.8] (ESTC)

Hamnet reflects this disarray in all its pre-2003 cataloging.

The modern standard ways of citing acts are similar to each other but do vary a bit: they are mostly in English; have different abbreviations for the monarchs; differences in use of periods and spacing

18 & 19 Cha 2 c 2

The Wikipedia article on citation of UK legislation defines the historic (pre-1963) citation forms as not including the calendar year, only the regnal year.

Remember that we need to create uniform titles incorporating the citation, so would not necessarily be deviating from standard forms by including the calendar year.

Q: If we do use the calendar year, do we use it as formally given in the document--which use Lady Day dating?

What do other libraries do?

BL:

LC. Lots of old cataloging. What I can tell of more recent records=Compilations: Laws, etc. (Anno regni Gulielmi et Mariae : 1690-1691) -- Individual acts without uniform titles, with the name of the act instead of "Anno regni" in 245

Berkeley. Mixed; ESTC

Harvard. Mixed; ESTC

Conclusion: Document and regularize ESTC rules but don't change them, and make updates in Hamnet.

"Printed at the Theatre"

Oxford University Press was founded in 1586, and set up its printing shop in the basement of the Sheldonian Theatre in 1669.

Access points in bibliographic records:

7102 Oxford University Press, ǂe printer.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 This is where I record research and practical decisions for cataloging topics and problems that aren't clear-cut.
-==Almanacs==
-===Fixed fields===
-Nature of contents: <code>5</code>, for "calendars"
-===Title===
-In general, consider the clause following a short title of author's last name and year as part of the title proper.
-10 ǂa Perkins, 1643. A new almanacke, and prognostication, for the yeere of our Lord God, 1643 : ǂb being the third from the bissextile or leape-yeere, and from the worlds creation, 5606 : composed and chiefly referred to the meridian of the famous city of London / |c made and set forth by Samuel Perkins, well-willer to the mathematicks.
-30 ǂa New almanacke, and prognostication, for the yeere of our Lord God, 1643
-===Publisher===
-Use relationship designator <code> ǂe publisher </code> for the Company of Stationers.
-===Form terms===
-7 Almanacs. ǂ2 rbgenr
-7 Ephemerides. ǂ2 rbgenr
-===Subject headings===
-*None, in general.
-*Almanacs with sections containing "Astrological judgments" or similar wording, use subject heading:
-:<code> 650 0 Mundane astrology ǂv Early works to 1800. </code>
-===Related place===
-Do not use [[MARC 751 Added Entry - Geographic Name| MARC field 751]] for the prime meridien or other associated placenames
-===Example===
-http://shakespeare.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=125254
-==Authority records==
-===Entity attribute clusters===
-'''Academics and scholars'''
-  English literature ǂa Education ǂ2 lcsh
-  Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 ǂ2 naf
-  College teachers ǂa Scholars ǂ2 lcsh
-'''Booktrade'''
-  Book industries and trade ǂ2 lcsh
-  Booksellers ǂ2 itoamc
-  Printers ǂ2 itoamc
-  Publishers ǂ2 itoamc
-'''Religious figures'''
-  Christianity ǂa Preaching ǂ2 lcsh
-  Church of England  ǂ2 naf
-  Clergy ǂ2 itoamc
-  Minister ǂa Preacher
-'''Theater folk'''
-  Theater ǂ2 lcsh
-  Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 ǂ2 naf
-  Actors ǂ2 itoamc
-  Theatrical directors ǂ2 itoamc
-  Theatrical managers ǂ2 itoamc
-  Theatrical producers ǂ2 itoamc
-'''Translators'''
-  English literature ǂ2 lcsh
-  Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 ǂ2 naf
-  Translating and interpreting  ǂ2 lcsh
-  Translators ǂ2 itoamc
 ==Bibles==
@@ Line 111: / Line 50: @@
 |}
-==Genre/form terms==
+==Acts of Parliament==
-List of form terms I've recently used that are not on our list
+:ESTC uniform title for single acts is based on ''Statutes of the Realm'', while modern citations are based on ''Halsbury's Statutes'', first published 1929.
+:Even within the ESTC, there are many variations in uniform titles, and some in choice of title (perhaps)--''Anno regni'' vs name of act given as a caption.
+::1° Jac.II Stat.1 c.8 (''Statutes of the Realm'')
+::1 Jac.II.stat.1.c.8] (ESTC)
+:Hamnet reflects this disarray in all its pre-2003 cataloging.
+:The modern standard ways of citing acts are similar to each other but do vary a bit: they are mostly in English; have different abbreviations for the monarchs; differences in use of periods and spacing
+::18 & 19 Cha 2 c 2
+:The [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citation_of_United_Kingdom_legislation Wikipedia article on citation of UK legislation] defines the historic (pre-1963) citation forms as not including the calendar year, only the regnal year.
+:Remember that we need to create uniform titles incorporating the citation, so would not necessarily be deviating from standard forms by including the calendar year.
+::Q: If we do use the calendar year, do we use it as formally given in the document--which use Lady Day dating?
-{| class="wikitable sortable"
+:What do other libraries do?
-|-
+::BL:
-! Formulated term !! Source code !! Copy-specific
+::LC. Lots of old cataloging. What I can tell of more recent records=Compilations: Laws, etc. (Anno regni Gulielmi et Mariae : 1690-1691) -- Individual acts without uniform titles, with the name of the act instead of "Anno regni" in 245
-|-
+::Berkeley. Mixed; ESTC
-| Fiction || ǂ2 rbgenr ||
+::Harvard. Mixed; ESTC
-|-
+:Conclusion: Document and regularize ESTC rules but don't change them, and make updates in Hamnet.
-| Folding errors (Binding) || ǂ2 rbbin || ǂ5 DFo
-|-
-|Hymnals || ǂ2 rbgenr ||
-|-
-| Liturgical books || ǂ2 rbgenr ||
-|-
-| Prices (Publishing) ||  ǂ2 rbpub ||
-|}
 =="Printed at the Theatre"==
@@ Line 139: / Line 79: @@
 Oxford University Press, ǂe printer.
-==Sermons==
-'''Subject headings'''
-<pre>630 00 <Sermon text, if known>, subdivided: ǂv Sermons ǂv Early works to 1800.
-  0 <Topic, if there is one>, subdvided: ǂv Sermons ǂv Early works to 1800.
-20 Church of England (or other Christian denomination), subdivided: ǂv Sermons ǂv Early works to 1800.</pre>
-Do ''not'' use subject heading: 650 0 Sermons, <language>
-===Genre terms===
-7 Sermons. ǂ2 rbgenr
-Use all appropriate genre terms down the Sermons hierarchy. For an episcopal visitation sermon, for example:
-7 Sermons. ǂ2 rbgenr
-7 Occasional sermons. ǂ2 rbgenr
-7 Visitation sermons. ǂ2 rbgenr
-===Location of activity===
-Add [[MARC 751 Added Entry - Geographic Nameǂ2MARC 751]] for the city the sermon was delivered, if named, even if it's the same as the publication place.
-===Example===
-*http://hamnet.folger.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=338631