The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards

MARC Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List


MARC PROPOSAL NO. 2011-02

DATE: May 27, 2011
REVISED:

NAME: RDA Production, Publication, Distribution and Manufacture Statements in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

SOURCE: RDA/MARC Working Group

SUMMARY: This paper proposes two options to allow for separate statements for production, publication, distribution and manufacture in the Bibliographic format. Option 1 is to define one field 264 with an indicator that designates the function being recorded in the field. Option 2 proposed 4 separate fields for each function. Included is a discussion of coding in the 008 date positions.

KEYWORDS: Field 260 (BD); Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint) (BD); RDA; Production Statement (BD); Publication Statement (BD); Distribution Statement (BD); Manufacture Statement (BD)

RELATED: 2011-DP01

STATUS/COMMENTS:
05/27/11 – Made available to the MARC community for discussion.

06/26/11 Results of MARC Advisory Committee discussion: Approved as amended. Adopt Option 1 and define new field 264 for production, publication, distribution, manufacture statements that may include place, agent, and date information for each and also copyright notice date; add "Copyright" as second indicator value; change name of subfield $c to "Date of production, publication, distribution, copyright, manufacture"; retain all other elements of new field 264 as written in the proposal. LC will revise the instructions for date type "t" in 008/06, as an editorial change.

07/19/11 - Results of LC/LAC/BL review - Agreed with the MARBI decision.


Proposal No. 2011-02: Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture Statements

1. BACKGROUND

RDA has separate elements for production, publication, distribution and manufacture statements, including place, name, and date. Currently in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format field 260 has no way to explicitly state whether the statement is one of production, publication or distribution, since $a and $b are defined as Place of publication, distribution etc. and Name of publisher, distributor, etc. Manufacturer has separate subfields in $e (Place), $f (Name) and $g (date).

In Discussion Paper No. 2008-DP05/4 (Items Not Requiring MARC 21 Format Changes for RDA) the MARC Advisory Committee explored these issues and determined that there was not a recognized need for such granularity in the format. However, during the US RDA Test, catalogers found it difficult to apply RDA with the lack of a more precise mapping between RDA and MARC 21, leading to some ambiguous displays in OPACs. Adding separate data elements in some way would facilitate specialized searches, for instance searching for a specific movie distributor in moving image records.  In addition it would support the identification task if this information were uniquely identified.  The MARC Advisory Committee discussed Discussion Paper No. 2011-DP01 (Changes to the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format to Accommodate RDA Production, Publication, Distribution and Manufacture Statements) at its meeting in January 2011, which further considered this issue and presented various options. Options included: 1) adding a second indicator to field 260 (Publication, Distribution, Etc. (Imprint)) that defines the function expressed in the field; 2) adding subfields in field 260 for each function’s place, publisher and date; and 3) adding 4 new fields for production, publication, distribution and manufacture. Discussion indicated that there was a clear rejection of option 2 adding the subfields, but opinions were divided between options 1 and 3. A fourth option was suggested to add one new field to accommodate these statements, with each function indicated by an indicator value.

Field 260 is currently defined as follows:

2. DISCUSSION

During the discussion of Discussion Paper No. 2011-DP01, participants agreed that it is desirable to allow field 260 to be used as it has been in the past both to accommodate the many existing records that use and rely on this field for various purposes, and for content standards that do not make a distinction between the functions. There was also clear consensus that adding new subfields, which would require three for each function (for place, entity  and date), would be too cumbersome, difficult to code and difficult to use. As a result of the previous discussions the RDA/MARC Working Group proposed that the following two options be considered.

Both options propose using subfield $a for Place, $b for Name of ... and $c for Date.  Further discussion indicated that there could be a need for the information carried by the first indicator (Sequence of  statements) in the four functions, so each option retains that. Also in both options field 260 is left as is, to be used for existing records and for cases where the content standard used does not make a distinction between the functions.

2.1. Add a new field 264 (Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture Statements) with an indicator to designate the function

A new field could be used for all four types of statements with an indicator value designating the particular function.

Note that in the first indicator it was necessary to change definitions that limited the values to publisher.

There is an advantage to this option in that it only uses one field instead of four with the indicator value indicating the function. 

Examples:

On source:  ABC Publishers, 2009
                   Distributed by Iverson Company, Seattle
264 #1 $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b ABC Publishers , $c 2009.
264 #2 $a Seattle : $b Iverson Company

On score:  Published in Boston, 2010;
                 Cambridge -- Kinsey Printing Company
                        No distribution information
264 #1 $a Boston : $b [publisher not identified], $c 2010
264 #3 $a Cambridge : $b  Kinsey Printing Company

2.2. Define 4 new fields

Field 264, 266, 267 and 268 could be defined for production, publication, distribution, and manufacture, respectively.  Each field is repeatable for cases where it is necessary for multiple first indicator values. The following could be added:

264      Production statement (R)
266      Publication statement (R)
267      Distribution statement (R)
268      Manufacture statement (R)

Each field would be defined as follows:

Note that fields 261, 262 and 265 were previously defined and are obsolete; field 263 is defined as Projected Publication Date. In the previous discussion, participants asked if we could reuse the previously defined fields, but OCLC reports that there are still existing records using those fields that were made obsolete, so this is not an option.

The advantage to this option is that it separates each function into a separate field and does not rely on an indicator to determine what the function is. A disadvantage is that it uses up all the rest of the fields in the 26X block, so adding a new field for copyright date would require use of another block of fields (see Proposal No. 2011-03 about adding the date of copyright notice).

Examples:

On source:  ABC Publishers, 2009
                   Distributed by Iverson Company, Seattle
266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b ABC Publishers, $c 2009.
267 ## $a Seattle : $b Iverson Company

On score:  Published in Boston, 2010;
                 Cambridge -- Kinsey Printing Company
                        No distribution information
266 ## $a Boston : $b [publisher not identified], $c 2010
268 ## $a Cambridge : $b Kinsey Printing Company

2.3. Definitions

Whether Option 1 or Option 2 is selected as preferred, the following definitions, based on scope statements in RDA could be used for the indicator value or field:

Production statement: A statement relating to the inscription, fabrication, construction, etc., of a resource in an unpublished form.

          Note:  For some types of resources, e.g. moving images, production does not imply that it is unpublished but refers to something more like a creation statement; use caution when the word ‘production’ and its variants (e.g., production company, producer) are used in a different context for published materials, as is common in moving image resources.

Publication statement: A statement relating to the publication, release, or issuing of a resource.

Distribution statement: A statement relating to the distribution of a resource in a published form.

Manufacture statement: A statement relating to the printing, duplicating, casting, etc., of a resource in a published form.

3. IMPACT ON 008 CODING

Structured forms of dates are recorded in 008/07-14 in the bibliographic record, with a code in 008/06 indicating what type of dates are being coded. In addition, some types of dates (for which there are defined subfields) are recorded in a structured form in field 046. During the US RDA Test some questions arose about how the table of precedence for 008 dates in the MARC 21 bibliographic format is applied and whether changes are needed in the coding.

Because of the increased granularity in recording specific functions represented by different dates and the fact that only two fixed field date fields are available, it will never be possible to get as much granularity in 008 date coding as is currently being proposed for 26X fields (and possibly 271) fields.  The main function of the 008 dates is to provide a structured date for filtering resources according to a single date or date range. Essentially the most important date should be used (considered a “key” date), and a table of precedence advises how to determine what to use. However, that table may be applied differently depending upon the type of material and how it originates. For instance, archival moving image resources generally code for production and release date in this field, since these are key for that form of material, while in the book world, publication is key.

Currently the language used in the MARC 21 bibliographic format is as follows:

Under 06/type of date/publication status:
“The choice of code for 008/06 is made concurrently with a determination of the appropriate dates for 008/07-14. For most records data is derived from information in field 260 (Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint)), field 362 (Dates of Publication and/or Sequential Designation), or from note fields.”

This definition could be changed as follows:
“The choice of code for 008/06 is made concurrently with a determination of the appropriate dates for 008/07-14. For most records data is derived from information in field 260 (Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint)), field 362 (Dates of Publication and/or Sequential Designation), fields 264, 266, 267 or 268 (or 264 if that option is approved) or from note fields.”

Under s - Single known date/probable date:
“Date consists of one known single date of distribution, publication, release, production, execution, writing, or a probable date that can be represented by four digits. The single date associated with the item may be actual, approximate, or conjectural (e.g., if the single date is uncertain). Code s is also used for a single unpublished item such as an original or historical graphic when there is a single date associated with the execution of the item.”

It can be seen from the above text that the current practice of putting publication, distribution, copyright and "production" information (in RDA's sense, that is, limited to unpublished materials) into the 260 field leads to the date 1 containing publication, distribution, copyright or production date under current practice.  This interpretation is reinforced by the language used in the definition of code s, "date of distribution, publication, release, production, execution, writing."

To continue current practice but make it more explicit for RDA users, and to try to get a date into the Date 1 as often as possible to support searching, limiting, and sorting, the following option was favored by the RDA-MARC Working Group.  Date 1 would be determined by putting the types of date in order of precedence and choosing the first one available (preference is given to always providing a date in Date 1 if possible). Different precedence is relevant depending upon whether the item is published or unpublished, as in the following:

For Published resources:
1. Publication
2. Distribution
3. Copyright
4. Manufacture

For Unpublished resources:
1. Production
2. Copyright

NOTE: this is close to the current MARC 21 approach except that it allows for use of manufacture date, if there is no publication, distribution, or production, execution, writing, or copyright date.

See Section 5 for examples of use of 008/06-14 with the new RDA elements.

4. PROPOSED CHANGES

4.1. Option 1. In the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format define field 264 (Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture Statements) as above.

4.2. Option 2. In the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format define the following four new fields as above:

264      Production statement
266      Publication statement
267      Distribution statement
268      Manufacture statement

5. EXAMPLES OF 008 CODING

Note that for brevity the following examples use the option of 4 separate fields, but if the other option is selected, it would be field 264 with the appropriate indicator value.

Example 1:

260 ## $a New York : $b Vintage Books, $c 2006, ©2005.

266 ## $a New York : $b Vintage Books, $c 2006.
271 ## $a ©2005.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        t
008/07-10  2006
008/11-14  2005

Example 2:

publication date supplied by the cataloger based on a copyright date
[Note that AACR2 allowed you to use a copyright date ‘in lieu of’ another date, RDA does not, it only allows the cataloger to “supply” a publication date based on other information, including a copyright date]
[Note that if a publication date were to be supplied based on the copyright date, the copyright date would not need to be recorded if you were only following RDA core elements; it would therefore not be necessary to include copyright date in field 271.]

Two options in RDA if a publication date not found: record that fact, or supply a date of publication:
Option 1:
266
## $a Northfield : $b Hedstrom Publishing Company, $c [date of publication not identified]
271 ## $a ©2007.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10   2007
008/11-14   ####

May also be recorded as:
Option 2:
266 ## $a Northfield : $b Hedstrom Publishing Company, $c [2007?]
271 ## $a ©2007.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        t
008/07-10  2007
008/11-14  2007

Example 3:

publisher information not found on resource, but distribution information found

266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b [publisher not identified], $c [date of publication not identified]
267 ## $a Burbank, CA : $b Distributed by Warner Home Video, $c [2009?]
271 ## $a ©2009.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10  2009
008/11-14  ####
[Note that code "t" specifies that date 1 is a publication/release/production date and NOT a distribution date. Thus copyright date is recorded according to table of precedence.]

Example 4:

on title page: Means Pub. Co., Omaha, Nebraska
on title page verso:  2009 distribution

266 ## $a Omaha, Nebraska : $b Means Pub. Co., $c [date of publication not identified]
267 ## $c 2009.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10  2009
008/11-14  ####

Example 5:

on source: Published 2009 by the International Group; 2009 printing, Johnson Graphics, New York and Buenos Aires]

266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b International Group, $c 2009.
268 ## $a New York : $b Johnson Graphics, $c 2009.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10  2009
008/11-14  ####

Example 6:

on source: Printed for distribution in Western Europe by ZZZ Printers (London, Zurich, and Vienna) in 2009]

266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b [publisher not identified], $c [date of publication not identified].
268 ## $a London : $b ZZZ Printers, $c 2009.

Recommended 008 coding:

008/06        s
008/07-10  2009
008/11-14  ####

Example 7:

An unpublished collection of manuscript material (collection contains varying materials dated from around 1870 to 1903)

264  ## $capproximately 1870-1903

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        i
008/07-10  1870
008/11-14  1903

Example 8:

on source:  ABC Publishers, 2009
                   Distributed by Iverson Company, Seattle 

266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b ABC Publishers, $c 2009.
267 ## $a Seattle : $b Iverson Company.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10  2009
008/11-14  ####

Example 9:

on score:  Published in Boston, 2010;
                 Cambridge -- Kinsey Printing Company
                        No distribution information]

266 ## $a Boston : $b [publisher not identified], $c 2010.
268 ## $a Cambridge : $b Kinsey Printing Company.

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06        s
008/07-10  2010
008/11-14  ####

Example 10:

A published  resource where dates are unknown but it is established that it is 1935 or later:

266 ## $a New York : $b [publisher not identified], $c [not before 1935]

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06            q
008/07-10        1935
008/11-14        2011

Example 11:

An unpublished resource where exact dates are unknown but a probable range of years can be established:

264 ## $c [between 1846 and 1853?]

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06             q
008/07-10        1846
008/11-14        1853

Example 12:

An unpublished resource  that does not have exact dates but it can be determined that it is produced no later than 1492.

264 ## $c [not later than 1492]

Recommended 008 coding:
008/06             q
008/07-10        14uu 
008/11-14        1492

Example 13:

Information found on video of an oral history interview (considered unpublished). No publication or distribution statement on source:

Copyright 2004 National Visionary Leadership Project
Interview date 12/04/2001

264 ## $c 2001 
271 ## $a ©2004

Recommended 008:

008/06        t
008/07-10  2001
008/11-14  2004

Example 14:

Copyright notice found on film. No publication or distribution statement on resource; distribution information found from additional research and supplied by cataloger.

© University of Maine at Orono 1985

266 ## $a [Place of publication not identified] : $b [publisher not identified], $c [date of publication not identified]
267 ## $a [Bucksport, Maine] : $b [Northeast Historic Film], $c [1986]
271 ## $a ©1985

Recommended 008 coding

008/06        t
008/07-10  1986
008/11-14  1985


HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List

The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
( 08/04/2011 )
Legal | External Link Disclaimer Contact Us