>Re: Thomas' comment, "and in fact most users are none the wiser and so assume >[sic] is part of the title." I'm curious where you get this fact. It may be a >function of different user bases
We serve users of all ages and all walks of life. Probably many who are not good spellers to begin with. In the example of "Inglourious basterds," I checked our record. There is indeed a 246 for the corrected title, so nothing would change with RDA. A better solution would be to utilize the flexibility in online displays and assign annotations on other elements a special place next to the affected element. RDA has three elements that can be brought to bear in the case of a clear mistake in the title proper: Title proper: Heirarchy in organizations Variant title: Hierarchy in organizations Note on title: Title should read: Hierarchy in organizations If "Note on title" was linked directly to the title element it annotates one could have a record display like: Title proper: Heirarchy in organizations * * (Title should read: Hierarchy in organizations) ... Variant title: Hierarchy in organizations The idea being that the original values in the RDA elements would be kept pure and this information would be brought together by virtue of the encoding used and style sheet applied (it's important to point out that this would be an encoding solution, not an RDA content standard solution). I think this would be very useful if automated and made consistent, because in looking at the list of examples in RDA it seems quite appropriate to flag similar title transcription issues in this way such as "title varies slightly." Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
