On 4/7/2011 5:36 PM, Gene Fieg wrote:
And while I may have become a bit too Platonic (who knows?), there is only one work here. The novel. The film and the film script are expressions.
Apparently even AACR2 disagrees with you, or they'd get the same 'main entry' under AACR2, which they do not, right?
How can the same work have more than one 'main entry', that doesn't make any sense just in AACR2 language alone, does it?
Again, I think it's important to emphasize that FRBR/RDA attempt to be most consistent with legacy practice, while formalizing and explicitly modelling it. You can certainly disagree with how AACR2 has been modelling things for ~30 years, or legacy cataloging practice before that too -- I don't think there's one existentially or platonically right answer, there is no way to 'experimentally' answer it by putting the book and a DVD under a microscope or something -- but that's FRBR/RDA is not attempting to fundamentally change AACR2's entity modelling choices, for better or worse. (Except perhaps when AACR2's entity modelling choices become apparent as inconsistent within themselves, once made explicit and formally modelled).
It's a convention. And the convention under both AACR2 and RDA is to consider a genre change to be a new work, as Thomas Brenndorfer helpfully explains referencing the actual RDA text.
