Thesis Cataloguing (RDA)

Thesis Cataloguing in RDA

16 February 2014

The RDA record describing a thesis would differ depending on whether it is print (considered unpublished) or electronic (considered published). This is a myth since photocopiers replaced carbon paper, particularly since today most print theses are printouts from the electronic version.

The 502 would be the same for both:

502 ##$aThesis (M.A.)--University College,
London, 1969.

or

502 ##$a$bPh.D$cUniversity of Louisville$d1997.

The second assumes the ILS has a display constant for 502. An alternative would be:

502 ##$a$gDissertation$bPh.D$cUniversity of Louisville$d1997.

Fields which differ between print and electronic.

Fixed fields vary:

Print: LDR/06 = t (manuscript)

Electronic: LDR/06 = a* (language); 007/00 = c (electronic)
*Used to be m computer file.

The 264 would differ (2nd indicator 1 means publisher; 0 producer).

Print:

264 1 $aLondon [England] :$bUniversity College, London,$c1969.

Electronic:

264 0 $aLondon [England] :$bUniversity College, London,$c1969.

Providing missing jurisdiction is optional.

The 300 would differ.

Print:

300 $ax, 100 pages :$billustrations ;$c31 cm

Electronic:

300 $a1 online resource (x, 100 pages) :$billustrations

or

300 $a1 PDF (x, 100 pages) :$billustrtions

RDA allows use of exact unit name as option.

Media terms would differ,

Print:

336 $atext$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$2rdamedia
338 $avolume$2rdacarrier

Electronic:

336 $atext$2rdamedia
337 $acomputer$2rdamedia or 337 $aelectronic$2isbdmedia
338 $aonline resource$2carrier

A major difference between AACR2 and RDA are the many RDA options; thus the "or" examples above.