Bob,
I had put this question to LChelp4rda in 2010, and was then told that
during the US RDA test, LC testers would represent such relationships
(or at least one of them for the first work manifested) with a 7XX
name/title authorized access point with second indicator "2" for a
whole-part relationship.
Admittedly, this explanation has shaped my view of the question,
although LC's practice may have changed since then. I couldn't find any
evidence for that in the training module on relationships, though:
http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/RDA%20training%20materials/LC%20RDA%20Training/Module%204_Relationships.doc
The case of a contributing author is not covered under the relationships
to persons, and for compilations, only the whole-part relationship is
treated, with the options of name/title entries or a contents note (p. 9).
Of course, LC doesn't speak "ex cathedra", and other interpretations of
RDA are certainly possible. I see your point about the MARC format.
Maybe my thinking is too strict here, as in German systems we do have
true links from title records to authority records for persons and
corporate bodies, and also links between several title records, e.g.
between the record for a monographic series as a whole and the
individual volumes in that series. It's also possible (although not done
very often) to have records for the individual articles in a collection,
linked to the record for the collection as a whole.
If there is a general feeling that it does not go against RDA to have
simple added entries (not name/title entries) under people who have
contributed to a collection, I would be very glad. Only, in that case I
would prefer to have a relationship designator which expresses that
clearly, such as "contributing author".
Heidrun
Robert Maxwell wrote:
The bibliographic record in MARC is not a surrogate for the work; it's
a mishmash of information about all the FRBR entities. So a
relationship designator added to a name in a bibliographic record does
not have to link the name to "the" work. Actually, though, in the
example cited you have more than one work, the aggregate work (the
collection) that the person edited/compiled, and the specific work
within the collection that the person wrote. Both of these are
described in the same MARC bibliographic record.
RDA isn't overly complicated---you can add whatever designators are
needed. So if a person is both an editor of a resource and the author
of one of the works in the resource in my opinion it's perfectly fine
to give whatever relationship designators are appropriate to the
person. Presumably if we were in an ER environment we would have a
link from the person to the specific work with the relationship
designator "author" and a separate link from the person to the
aggregate work with the relationship designator "compiler" or
whatever. The trouble is the MARC bibliographic record comprises all
these entities at once. But in the current environment I see nothing
wrong with recording both "author" and "compiler" (or "editor of
compilation" or whatever) with an access point recorded in a 7XX field.
It is not correct to say it is not possible in RDA to record added
access points for persons who contributed to a collection, or to
record added access points to works within a collection. You can
record the authorized access point for any (or all) of the
contributing authors in 7XXs and/or you can record the authorized
access point for any or all of the works in 7XXs. Again, the MARC
bibliographic record is /not/ just describing the collection as a
whole, it also describes the works within the collection; but that's a
MARC thing, not an RDA thing, and the MARC structure is no different
from when we were applying AACR2.
Bob
Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568
"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine
ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R.
Snow, 1842.
*From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Heidrun
Wiesenmüller
*Sent:* Thursday, April 04, 2013 9:52 AM
*To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
*Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] multiple relationship designators
Richard's question leads right into the heart of something which has
been puzzling me for some time.
If I understand RDA correctly, it would be wrong to use the
relationship designator "author" in an ordinary added entry field
here, because it can only be used for somebody who is a creator. The
four editors, however, are not creators of the work as a whole (the
anthology), but only of their own contributions in the book. So I
think, "author" cannot be applied to them with respect to the work as
a whole. The only possibility would be to record a relationship to a
related work, i.e. to the essay (or whatever it is) included in the
collection. By the way, I'm not sure about the situation in MARC: I
assume it is possible to record relationship designators in a
name/title entry and/or in a 505 note?
The same thing is true for my favourite title pages of collections,
which show something like "with contributions by" and a list of names.
According to the German RAK (and also AACR2, I believe), there would
have been an obligatory added entry under the first named person in
such a list. In RDA I believe this is no longer possible, as the
authors of the essays do not have a direct relationship to the
collection at all. With respect to the collection as a whole, they are
nothing - neither creator, nor other person associated with a work,
nor contributor. So there can't be a direct relationship to them. The
only way to make an added entry for somebody who has contributed to
the collection is to record a relationship to a related work.
I can see the reasoning behind it, but I still feel RDA is overly
complicated here.
Heidrun
Richard Baumgarten wrote:
I am working on an anthology of local literature. I am listing
all four editors. All of them have some of their writings in the
book. I am not creating a Contents note because of the sheer size
that it would be. Should I just use the relationship designator of
editor or use both author and editor?
Richard Baumgarten
Cataloger
Johnson County Library
P.O. Box 2901
Shawnee Mission, Kansas 66201-1301
(913) 495-2454
baumgart...@jocolibrary.org <mailto:baumgart...@jocolibrary.org>
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi <http://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
