28.08.2012 19:29, Brenndorfer, Thomas:
RDA has four conventions for conveying relationships between works
and between expressions (relationships between manifestations and
between items use all of these conventions except authorized access
points):
1. identifier
2. authorized access point
3. structured description
4. unstructured description.
...
The conventions we use (identifiers, authorized access points,
structured descriptions, unstructured descriptions) will largely be
determined by the application we are using, but all conventions
should convey the same elementary information about a relationship
between specified entities.
The big question is: To whom can those conventions convey their meaning?
Only 1. and 2. can convey it to a program in order to elicit any action
from it, beyond merely displaying it. And that's what we want, more
often than not: to make relationship information actionable. Then
however, the desired actions may vary according to the nature of the
relationship: whether we have a translation, a summary, an updated
edition, or whatever.
All of this mandates machine-actionable linking, and qualifiers to
determine the semantics of a link. And since there may be more than one
such link per record, the identifier or access point has to be combined
with the qualifier in one field. And not, for example, the preferred
title in a 730 and a vernacular qualifier in a 370.
Is there a vocabulary of standardized qualifier terms anywhere, for
this purpose? If not, make one and make its use mandatory, make it a
core subelement for relationships to work and expression.
B.Eversberg
