Hi Angie,



Here is some useful guidance from the Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Materials, Cartographic, based on AACR2 and published this year. http://rbms.info/files/dcrm/dcrmc/DCRMC.pdf



Referring to DCRM(C), Area 4B concerns Place of publication, distribution, production, etc.  The general rule is: For manuscripts and other unpublished material, transcribe the names of places of production as part of this element.

This would be encoded in MARC as 264  _0, production.



Area 4C concerns Name of publisher, distributor, etc.  The general rule is: For manuscripts and other unpublished material, do not include this element. If the name of the producer appears in the chief source of information, transcribe it as a statement of responsibility. If the name of the producer appears elsewhere in the material, give it in a note.



I think you could follow this guidance for RDA cataloging and you would not be wrong.  I also agree that providing only the 264 $c is appropriate for unpublished materials if you do not know the place of production, based on RDA 2.7 "Core element" note for Production Statement.



Cheers,

Louise



Louise Ratliff

Social Sciences and Map Catalog Librarian
UCLA Library Cataloging & Metadata Center
11020 Kinross Ave.
Box 957230
Los Angeles, CA 90095-7230
(310)206-5853

From: Maps-L: Map Librarians, etc. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angela R Cope
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 1:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RDA and manuscript maps


I've been seeing some records for manuscript items (hand written, unpublished) with 264 _ 0 and $$a [Place of publication not identified] : $$b [publisher not identified]



This is confusing to me. Is this right? AACR2 didn't have a subfield a or b because the item wasn't published.



Can someone tell me what is the correct way to do a 264 for manuscript items?



Thanks for the help.



Angie