But uniform title has been used for lots of things other than title
of the work, exactly. Especially by music catalogers. Either those
uses are going to be left un-filled by RDA or these catalogers are
going to continue using the title of work to do things that aren't
about naming the
, July 22, 2009 8:44 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
RDA doesn't define a uniform title, but instead (well, I think of it
as instead) has title of the work. I think this will be an
improvement, in part because every Work should have a title
RDA has both authorized access point for work and authorized access point
for expression. There are no rules at present for authorized access
points for specific manifestations or items.
Adam
^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington
Adam, that's odd, because the RDA list of elements says title proper is
in the manifestation group.
kc
Adam L. Schiff wrote:
RDA has both authorized access point for work and authorized access
point for expression. There are no rules at present for authorized
access points for specific
-Message d'origine-
De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Karen Coyle
Envoyé : 22 juillet 2009 11:44
À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
RDA doesn't define a uniform
In the case of multi-part monographs, LCNAF has cases of authorized
access points for what I take to be manifestation-level entities, e.g.
Tolkien, J. R. R. (John Ronald Reuel), 1892-1973. Lord of the rings
(Silver anniversary edition) [LCCN n 42024986]
which is a controlled heading for a
: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
But uniform title has been used for lots of things other than title
of the work, exactly. Especially by music catalogers. Either those
uses are going to be left un-filled by RDA or these catalogers are
going
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Jonathan Rochkind
Envoyé : 22 juillet 2009 11:45
À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series
But uniform title has been used for lots of things other than title
of the work, exactly. Especially by music catalogers
Earlier LAC was very responsive in answering questions about
standards, but I've received no response to twice asking whether LAC
will follow the PCC decision to stop qualifying remote electronic
series as (online), but use the print form of the series. (Since we
provide MARC records to several
Adam Sschiff said:
The PCC decision applies only to bibliographic records for remote
electronic resources being authenticated according to the
provider-neutral policy.
SLC creates records for remote electronic aggregators and publishers.
Some publishers produce print and electronic versions
Hmmm. Doesn't the provider-neutral e-monograph report say that All
e-monographic resources cataloged on OCLC should follow the
Prover-Neutral model from Day One, even if the resource is available
from only one provider at the time of ctatloging.? And that basically
OCLC will neutralize any
Greta,
Good questions, to which I don't have answers. It's still not clear how
easy it will be for OCLC to collapse multiple records into one, and
whether they will enforce a provider-neutral policy on everyone. I don't
think it's going to be possible either - the rules in AACR2 and RDA say
Adam L. Shift said:
I hope I haven't shifted too much from post to post, but nevertheless, my
name remains Schiff. It's German for ship.
,,, and whether future revisions of RDA sanction the description
of multiple manifestations on one record.
The same electcronic item from different
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
The same electcronic item from different providers are not different
manifestations, any more than different pritings of the same edition
are different manifestations. An electronic provider is not a
publisher.
It depends on whether the electronic item is a copy, a
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Adam L. Schiff said:
...and whether future revisions of RDA sanction the description
of multiple manifestations on one record.
The same electronic item from different providers are not different
manifestations, any more than different pritings of the same edition
are
15 matches
Mail list logo
