2013 08:37:18 -0500
From: Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional
collective
/ Resource Description and Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
To:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective
titles
Adam,
These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first
sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none
Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller:
I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which
consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation
of works. Rather, in the case of...
This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for.
We are talking about the level of the work here.
The title of the manifestation is, of course, always recorded in the
respective manifestation element.
Heidrun
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller:
I think the interesting point to note is that not
Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems.
Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections)
Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them
that way?
FWIW, my institution has been removed CCTs from LC records ever since the
Am 20.12.2013 14:32, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller:
We are talking about the level of the work here.
The title of the manifestation is, of course, always recorded in the
respective manifestation element.
But you know that we had non of that casuistry in our rules?
And for reasons that had been
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
But you know that we had non of that casuistry in our rules?
And for reasons that had been discussed thoroughly for quite some time.
Did we or our users suffer from that or were they pestering us
for qualified contentional collective titles?
Isn't it just the very
On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Adger Williams wrote:
Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings?
(Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections)
Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated
them that way?
James Weinheimer wrote:
On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Adger Williams wrote:
Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings?
(Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections)
Would they not serve their function less confusingly if
On 12/20/2013 4:15 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Are you really sure they can? My feeling is that up to now, both aims
have been fulfilled only partly. Maybe this is what makes it so
unsatisfactory.
/snip
I honestly don't think that is the real problem. For the public, the
collective
James,
Before making our records even more complicated (and committing more
and more ever-disappearing resources) it would make sense to find out
if collective uniform titles are/could be useful to the public and if
not, why not, and then continue from there. Otherwise, we are all
working on
On 12/20/2013 5:13 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Thanks, I wasn't aware of this LCRI (I'm afraid there's still a lot I
don't know about Anglo-American cataloging). Indeed this sounds rather
complicated and a lot of effort. Also, I'm not sure I've really
understood its consequences:
Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 4:37 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective
titles
Adolfo,
I've read up
Adolfo,
My understanding of FRBR is that regardless of independent existence prior to its
appearance, each poem, short story, song, etc., is considered a work in and of itself
regardless of whether their creator considered them such. Since a compilation
is simply defined as a gathering of
Dec 2013 08:37:18 -0500
From: Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective
titles
Description and Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective
titles
Adam,
These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first
sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none
-BAC.GC.CA
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective
titles
Adam,
These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first sentence
of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none of these collections was treated as being known
under its own
17 matches
Mail list logo
