-----Original Message-----
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 12:08
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Sources of information for other title information
Deborah,
I absolutely agree that the point in question should be handled the way
you say in actual cataloging ("If Other Title Information is taken from
a different source than the Title Proper, make a note on the source of
the Other Title Information if it is considered important"). And I
would really love to be convinced by the "note argument" that this is
indeed what RDA tells us to do.
But somehow it doesn't work for me. I agree that a note on title
(2.20.2) can, on principle, also refer to other title information. The
sub-chapters 2.20.2.4 and 2.20.2.5 are cases in point. But I can still
see no evidence that 2.20.2.3 can be applied to other title elements
than the ones which are explicitly mentioned here. And there's still
the small problem of 2.3.4.2 stating that we must take other title
information from the same source as the title proper - so then why
should we make a note saying we've taken it from elsewhere?
I like your metaphor of "picking apart a legal document". Myself, I
often compare cataloging to the solving of riddles, telling my students
that people who like doing puzzles will often also enjoy cataloging.
Personally, I quite like putting rules together step-by-step in order
to logically arrive at a solution for a complex situation. But I'd
still say that RDA is sometimes overdoing it and seems less explicit
than other codes of rules. If we really are supposed to deduce possible
sources of information for an element from a rule on a note instead of
the chapter called "Sources of information" for the element in
question, this would be a rather roundabout way of doing it. In German
we've got a saying which roughly translates as: "from behind through
the chest in the eye"...
Heidrun
Am 18.12.2012 16:50, schrieb Deborah Fritz:
Heidrun,
I only used the parallel title note as an example. So as long as the
2.20.2.3. note can be applied to Other Title Information, I think we
can use any wording we like for this situation (I just liked the
parallel title
wording)
So, can we use 2.20.2.3 for a note about Other Title Information? I
believe, yes, because that instruction says: " A note on title is a
note providing information on the source from which a title was
taken,
the date the title was viewed, variations in titles, inaccuracies,
deletions, etc., or other information relating to a title."
And 2.3.1.1 Scope says: " For purposes of resource description,
titles
are categorized as follows:
a) title proper (see 2.3.2)
b) parallel title proper (see 2.3.3)
c) other title information (see 2.3.4)"
As for RDA being like a medieval theological treatise ... we had to
do
this kind of step-by-step reasoning with AACR also, to 'tease out' an
answer from a string of rules; I used to tell my workshop
participants
that interpreting AACR was like picking apart a legal document, and
now I will say the same for RDA :-}
If my reasoning turns out to be solid, then in my teaching, I will
simplify all of this to simply say: "If Other Title Information is
taken from a different source than the Title Proper, make a note on
the source of the Other Title Information if it is considered
important"
But I will store my thought process somewhere, just in case I ever
have to justify this 'interpretation' to anyone. Unless, of course,
we
get an LC-PCC PS or a PS from some other National Library to clarify
this for everyone.
What fun, indeed!
Deborah
- - - - - - - -
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@marcofquality.com
www.marcofquality.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun
Wiesenmüller
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 10:08 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Sources of information for other title
information
Deborah,
Good point.
Still, I don't really feel comfortable with this reasoning, because
the case of a parallel title seems rather different from the other
title information, as RDA says in 2.3.3.2: "Take parallel titles
proper from any source within the resource." So, we are explicitly
allowed to take it from any place within the resource - unlike other
title information.
Therefore I'm not sure whether we can draw a conclusion by analogy
here.
I also find it odd (and a bit worrying) that other title information
is not explicitly mentioned in 2.20.2.3, whereas it is mentioned
explicitly in 2.20.2.4. The only title elements mentioned in 2.20.2.3
are title proper, parallel title proper, variant title, earlier title
proper and later title proper.
True, there is an example with a subtitle ("Vol. 1, no. 3- has
subtitle:
Studies in educational administration") at 2.20.2.3 but I think this
should be seen as a variant title (cf. the definition: "A variant
title is a title associated with a resource that differs from a title
recorded as the title proper, a parallel title proper, other title
information, parallel other title information, earlier title proper,
later title proper, key title, or abbreviated title.").
By the way, isn't it funny the way we're doing exegesis on a text
like RDA?
Almost as if it was a medieval theological treatise...
Heidrun
Deborah Fritz wrote:
Mulling over 2.3.4.2, for myself, I see it says: "Take other title
information from the same source as the title proper (see 2.3.2.2)."
OK, that is a very direct instruction--take it from the same source.
Then 2.3.2.2 says: "Take the title proper from the preferred source
of information for the identification of the resource as specified
under 2.2.2-2.2.3"
Then 2.2.2.2 says: "For a book "use the title page, title sheet, or
title card (or image thereof) as the preferred source of
information."
So, I agree with Heidrun that RDA is saying that if you find a Title
Proper on the title page, then that is the only source that you can
use for the Other Title Information.
2.2.4 says "If information taken from a source outside the resource
itself is supplied [including for other title information], indicate
that fact either by means of a note or by some other means (e.g.,
through coding or the use of square brackets)." But the other title
information is not from outside the resource, so, as Heidrun says,
this does not apply to our situation
But there is the Note instruction at: 2.20.2 Note on Title. Don't
forget that 'Title' covers all the elements listed under 2.3, so
this
note covers Other Title Information.
2.20.2.3 specifically mentions making a note for a Parallel Title
Proper:
"If a parallel title proper is taken from a different source than
the
title proper, make a note on the source of the parallel title proper
if it is considered important"
And then there is 2.20.2.5: "Make notes on other details relating to
a title if they are considered to be important for identification or
access."
So, I would apply the reasoning given at 2.20.2.3 for Parallel Title
Proper to Other Title Information and say that if Other Title
Information is taken from a different source than the Title Proper,
we can make a note on the source of the Other Title Information if
it
is
considered important.
And in MARC terms that would mean that a note about a subtitle from
a
cover would be given in the 246 (just as we have been doing under
AACR)
as:
246 1# $i Subtitle from cover: $a VF-17's Top Guns in World War II
Does this sound logical?
Deborah
-----Original Message-----
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun
Wiesenmüller
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:59 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Sources of information for other title information
I'm mulling over RDA 2.3.4.2: "Take other title information from the
same source as the title proper."
With books, the title proper is usually found on the title page.
Does
that really mean that under RDA I can only take other title
information which is also placed on the t.p.? It's certainly not
uncommon to find useful other title information elsewhere in the
resource, e.g. on the cover. According to our German rules, I'd
record this as other title information as well, but put it in square
brackets (to indicate that it doesn't come from the prescribed
source).
As square brackets (or some other means) in RDA are only used to
mark
information stemming from outside the resource, I'd have assumed
that
all other title information found on the resource itself (no matter
where) is recorded in the same way. But 2.3.4.2 makes it seem as if
other title information which is not in the same place as the title
proper is simply disregarded.
I can't believe that this is really the case. So I must either have
misunderstood 2.3.4.2 or missed another rule, probably a more
general one.
I've already read through 2.2 carefully, but haven't found a clue.
Can somebody enlighten me?
Heidrun
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191
Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191
Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191
Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
