--- Begin Forwarded Message ---
>Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1998 15:04:08 -0400
>From: Elizabeth U Mangan <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Cataloging: 045 Time codes? (fwd) -Reply
In general the 045$b is used in cataloging cartographic items when the date of situation differs from the date of publication.
When using LC classification, this translates to when the date in the 050 doesn't agree with the date in 260, an 045 is
needed. A note giving the date of situation is included only when the date of situation is not already in the title or otherwise
represented in the record.
Also, in general, only $b of the 045 is used. The $a subfield is coded information while the $b subfield is the actual date,
Betsy Mangan
>>> Johnnie Sutherland <[log in to unmask]> 09/25/98 02:28pm >>>
2 messages:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 11:03:02 -0700
>From: Mary Larsgaard <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Cataloging: 045 Time codes? (fwd)
045$b seems both useful and easy to fill out - and to the best of my (limited) knowledge of this field, if you fill out $b you
probably don't need to fill out $a.
Either a 500 with Date of Situation OR a title that had the date of data in it would be sufficient reason for using 045.
Mary Larsgaard
UCSB
At 09:48 AM 9/24/98 -0400, you wrote:
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 00:00:39
>From: John Buelow <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Cataloging: 045 Time codes?
>
>[this message is being cross-posted on AUTOCAT]
>
>
>Can anyone comment on the usefulness of field 045 Time Period of Content to
>describe Date of Situation when cataloging in the Map format? I assume the
>field would be used only when a 500 Date of Situation note is also present.
> If so, do I prefer to use the code in subfield |a, the formatted date in
>subfield |b, or both?
>
>
>John Buelow
>New York Historical Society
>[log in to unmask]
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>From: Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
This is an interesting question, that I have wondered about, myself. My personal feeling is that it is useful when the work in
question portrays a specific period of historical time or a range of eras, then the 045 has usefulness. It can allow a more
precise or even more general range of dates than can the years of a 651 subfield of History. If the item merely shows the
situation at the time of publication, the 260 subfield covers that just fine, thank you.
_________________________________________
Ken Grabach <[log in to unmask]>
Documents Dept.
Miami University Libraries
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA
--- End Forwarded Message ---
|
