Adam, that's odd, because the RDA list of elements says title proper is
in the manifestation group.
kc
Adam L. Schiff wrote:
RDA has both authorized access point for work and authorized access
point for expression. There are no rules at present for authorized
access points for specific manifestations or items.
Adam
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
asch...@u.washington.edu
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009, Karen Coyle wrote:
RDA doesn't define a "uniform title," but instead (well, I think of
it as instead) has "title of the work". I think this will be an
improvement, in part because every Work should have a title, whereas
uniform titles were the exception rather than the rule. Oftentimes
the title of the work will be the same as the "title proper", which
is associated with the manifestation. There doesn't, however, seem to
be a specific title for the expression. Maybe someone here could
clarify this for us.
kc
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
hal Cain wrote:
Just what is the uniform title intended to do here? To serve as a
one-line identifier for what's being catalogued; to provide a linking
point for the work content; or to provide a linking point for the
expression embodied?
This is a really important point. In my reading of our history, the
"uniform title" has traditionally been intended to do _several_
things, things that sometimes work at cross-purposes. Many of these
things haven't really been "specified", so much as they are
tradition -- and in the current environment, often applied
mechanistically without thinking about intent.
We need to become clear on what uniform title is supposed to do --
and I believe, once we have that clarity, it will also be clear that
"uniform title" alone can't do all the things it's been implicitly
depended upon (or hoped for?) to do. We need instead one mechanism
for collocating works, another for collocating expressions, another
to serve as user-presentable display label (supporting doing this in
multiple languages!), another to say what language an expression is
in, and another to do... whatever it is that music catalogers do
with uniform title (there are probably half a dozen different things
just in music cataloging practice, none of which I understand!)
Jonathan
Until we have that clear (and RDA discussions have failed to make that
clear to me -- perhaps on account of my inattention, but I can usually
follow clear exposition) we'll go on making ad-hoc and conflicting
decisions.
FWIW I don't think the application of FRBR categories provides us with
the tools to make the distinctions people are talking about here --
they're not subtle enough, at least not within the framework of the
MARC21 bibliographic format. And the success will depend on the
display
created, a matter which RDA chose not to address, but crucial to the
outcome.
Hal Cain
Dalton McCaughey Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
h...@dml.vic.edu.au
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kco...@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kco...@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
