This is a provocative discussion. I agree with what you say, but I would
like to make the following observation
On 26/10/2012 22:30, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
James Weinheimer wrote:
It occurs to me that we have the concept of *the* title of an item
but as we see here, there are
Jim,
actually, when writing my last mail I was asking myself whether I should
include a sentence on the question of which is the most prominent
position. Because it's true that the front cover for an ordinary
person (not hindered by a librarian's education) may be as important or
even more
On 25/10/2012 15:11, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Let's take the following example:
A becomes B (major change)
B becomes C (minor change)
C becomes D (minor change)
D becomes E (major change)
This leads to the following three entities:
Entity 1 (A)
Entity 2 (B, C and D)
Entity 3
John Hostage wrote:
I think basing the description on the latest issue makes sense, especially in
the context of a centralized database. This is essentially what we do already
for integrating resources (RDA 2.1.2.4). Germany always seems to be years
ahead of us technologically. Maybe they
James Weinheimer wrote:
These sorts of practices always interest me and I try to come up with
ideas that bring them together. One way of looking at this would be
that a record for a serial is the manifestation, and that this single
manifestation has variant titles (not necessarily earlier
On 25/10/2012 08:20, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
I'd like your thoughts on a problem which the German library community
has to face when making the move to RDA: It's the question of whether
the description of a serial should be based on the first or the latest
issue (in cases of minor
James Weinheimer wrote:
A question:
When a serial has title changes A to B to C to D (D is the latest
title) and a library has only A and B, what does a library do now?
Firstly, bear in mind that of course we also have split entries, so if
there is a major change, a new record will be
On 25/10/2012 10:58, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
James Weinheimer wrote:
A question:
When a serial has title changes A to B to C to D (D is the latest
title) and a library has only A and B, what does a library do now?
Firstly, bear in mind that of course we also have split entries, so
Heidrun Wiesenmüller asked regarding serial records:
What are your feelings about first vs. latest issue
- which advantages and disadvantages do you see? If you were free to
choose, i.e. if there was no existing data to consider, and if we assume
(for the sake of the argument) that both
James Weinheimer wrote:
So it is more of a difference in what is considered a minor change.
No, actually we've got exactly the same rules for what is considered a
major change and what is seen as a minor change. I believe there used to
be some differences, but since 2007 we've been using
Mary L. Mastraccio wrote:
Although I understand the logic of first issue, I agree with Germany's logic that the
latest issue is the current valid information so should be the basis of cataloging.
Current records when cataloged can become out of date over time but the
record [assuming it is
Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 6:43 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] First issue vs. latest issue
Mary L. Mastraccio wrote:
Although I understand the logic of first issue, I agree with Germany's logic
that the latest issue is the current valid
Heidrun said:
... whether the description of a serial should be based on the first
or the latest issue (in cases of minor variations, which do not call
for a new entry altogether).
The difficulty with latest issue, is that the latest issue today, this
week, this month, or this year is not the
I think basing the description on the latest issue makes sense, especially in
the context of a centralized database. This is essentially what we do already
for integrating resources (RDA 2.1.2.4). Germany always seems to be years
ahead of us technologically. Maybe they can propose a revision
John, Ed and All :
Hi -- Yes, I must agree that I read Heidrun's description of the
Zeitschriftendatenbank (serials union catalogue, ZDB) with a certain
amount of envy. I was especially struck by the practical appeal of the
following feature:
snip
Automatic processes copy the relevant records
15 matches
Mail list logo
