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it is print (considered unpublished) or electronic (considered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
The 502 would be the same for both:
502 ##$aThesis (M.A.)--University College,
502 ##$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).
264 1 $aLondon [England] :$bUniversity College, London,$c1969.
264 0 $aLondon [England] :$bUniversity College, London,$c1969.
Providing missing jurisdiction is optional.
The 300 would differ.
300 $ax, 100 pages :$billustrations ;$c31 cm
300 $a1 online resource (x, 100 pages) :$billustrations
300 $a1 PDF (x, 100 pages) :$billustrtions
RDA allows use of exact unit name as option.
Media terms would differ,
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.