Reconciliation

Hello everyone, I was going to just go off the last posts, but when getting into it thought the discussion might work better when addressing field by field.
Also, the revised monograph was sent via email. And to clarify - the title page does not list the illustrator, only the verso. Does this make any changes to our cataloged record?

Fixed fields: I think we are all have the same except for the “ILLS” field. Toshu’s photograph explanation sounds reasonable, where was that taken from? I haven’t seen any definitions, just a list and in several places. I’ve also never seen the “o” designation. So then the "ills" in the fixed field area should just be "a"? Are there any other variations in the fixed fields?
020 – all same
040 – all same
042 – well I missed that field and an easy one.
050 – This is called “Library of Congress Call Number” and 090 is Locally Assigned LC-type Call Number. Similar situation with the Dewey Decimal numbers: 092 is “Locally Assigned Dewey Call Number” where 082 is: “Dewey Decimal Classification Number” Since Dr. Ellett said use 082 maybe we should also use 050 for the LCC number? Or is this something we need clarification on. I’m confused!!
082/092 – DDC number, Great - we got confirmation our Dewey number is good: 635.967109033

The added .T55 2005 is for LCC only, not DDC. Toshu asked about this part and the .T55 came from the tables for Library of Congress Catalog numbers, not Dewey or cutter tables. Add for the history part/historical aspect. Also, the subfield “b” for the Dewey number, do we include this? I'm now thinking no.

100 – all the same here
245 – The title does start with the article "A" so we need to include that and the indicator should reflect skipping the article. Since it's only one letter would the indicator be 2? Also, I just noticed my record did not follow the correct capitalization format.
260 - We are almost all the same. Only difference is for the copyright some of us have a “c” before the date others don’t. Which is correct?

300 – the size - I think we include both since the length is bigger than the height. Under the illustration description Natalie had: (color photographs & black and white drawings). Where others had the abbreviated (some col.). Is this a cataloger choice area? Which is correct?

440 – the series statement. Again I capitalized words in error. I included under subfield “v” before the number “no.” since I thought that was prescribed, but now I’m not finding that. Probably we don’t include this?

500 – Added notes, do we want to include the "Notes follow each chapter."? I think its up to the cataloger, or optional. I added it…any thoughts?

504 – all same here

650 – subject classification. Do we include any indicators?
Also Natalie had different subject/an added entry and not having Historical as part of the subject. I was wondering about the additional subject also….

700 – added entries, all same here.

Final question, about the rules - how many do we need? I believe Dr. Ellett said they are optional and you can include to justify your cataloging. This was how the 248 class was. I actually never added the rules and did okay anyway. Any thoughts.

okay, last for now, in our final record we will have to be very careful about punctuation as Amber mentioned. I also noticed that we have some leading spaces before the fields, in my record as well. It's so easy to do! So we really need to do the fine tooth comb on this area.
Did I miss something that we aren’t agreed upon in our individual cataloging?