Thomas Brenndorfer said:
In several early chapters in RDA there is only a thin blue line separating the movement
from manifestation attributes to item attributes, and from work attributes to expression
attributes. For an example of a boundary, see the blue separator Other Identifying
26.11.2012 12:17, James Weinheimer:
Let's face it: the FRBR structure is bizarre and difficult even for
trained catalogers to grasp.
... and to apply consistently end efficiently.
The FRBR user tasks are from an earlier time, and in any case, the
public hasn't been able to do them since
My own practice is to use all the content types I need to describe the
resource. I usually include content types corresponding to anything I've put in
300 $b (in addition to text).
Bob
Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham
Then, in MARC, it can sometimes be using $e illustrator, but at other times $e
artist? Or would one be using both terms? It's somewhat confusing to me.
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu
JSC Secretary jscsecret...@rdatoolkit.org 11/23/2012 8:14 AM
Jenny,
The
My understanding is that:
If the illustrations are integral to the work, the person who
drew/painted them is a creator, or co-creator, and so the relationship
designator should be artist.
If the illustrations are complementary to the work, and belong at
expression level (they contribute to the
snip
Anyway, I really don't like this speculating around in this list
with no input from those who should know more and might easily resolve
errors in our wild guesses. Can this be called a discussion list? It is
rather another Speakers' Corner, inconsequential at the end of the day.
Not the first
And the searcher, in order to search successfully, would have to know
this distinction in our use of a different qualifier for the same person
under different circumstances, as well, I presume?
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
j...@franciscan.edu
Jenny Wright
The distinction between “artist” and “illustrator” currently exists in the
choices for main entry heading. Catalogers have to know that an artist can be a
main entry heading, and an illustrator can only be an added entry. The
distinction comes down to knowing what is the work and what is the
And all this helps the public how?
--
Laurence S. Creider
Interim Head
Archives and Special Collections Dept.
University Library
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM 88003
Work: 575-646-4756
Fax: 575-646-7477
lcrei...@lib.nmsu.edu
On Mon, November 26, 2012 9:19 am, Brenndorfer, Thomas
As an option for navigating the relationships people have had to creative
works, there is the possibility of very user-friendly approaches, as in this
IMDB example for the many job types Clint Eastwood has had in relation to films:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm142/
Current library catalogs
Wotta boon! (The fact of IMDb already existing notwithstanding). And let's
extend this fantastic accomplishment to other areas of interest and inquiry,
too. How long until I can consult my local OPAC to find out who won the batting
title in the Pacific Coast League in 1932?
Mike Tribby
Ox Eckhardt hit .371 in 1932 for the Mission Reds to win the Pacific Coast
League batting title.
But where, if anywhere, do you draw the line? My need to know about and do
research on oldtime minor league baseball doesn't measure up to the frequent
examples of OPAC users starved for
Lynne J. LaBare wrote:
I am new to RDA cataloging and request your help in the correct way to
record a statement of responsibility for a series in the 800 field. The
example I have is as follows:
800 1_ $aSnyder, Maria V., $e author.$t Healer series ;$v 2.
Please inform me if I am
Mike Tribby wrote:
Ox Eckhardt hit .371 in 1932 for the Mission Reds to win the Pacific Coast
League batting title.
But where, if anywhere, do you draw the line? My need to know about
and do research on oldtime minor league baseball doesn't measure up to
the frequent examples of OPAC users
Are we required to use $e in RDA, or is it an option?
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Kevin M Randall k...@northwestern.eduwrote:
Lynne J. LaBare wrote:
I am new to RDA cataloging and request your help in the correct way to
record a statement of responsibility for a series in the 800
Good point, and what often gets short shrift is the importance of applying the
logic of the user tasks. If the data doesn't help to find, identify, select or
obtain a resource, then it's not bibliographically relevant.
Beyond that, there is scaling effect in RDA, where essential elements are
To make a parallel between Clint Eastwood and Ox Eckhardt, your desire to find
out that Ox Eckhardt hit .371 in 1932 for the Mission Reds to win the Pacific
Coast League batting title would be akin to finding out that Clint Eastwood
took x number of days to direct the film UNFORGIVEN, or worked
Sorry. Should be series instead of serial.
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Joan Wang jw...@illinoisheartland.orgwrote:
There is an authority record for the serial in OCLC. According to OCLC
current practice, catalogers should use access points as established in the
authority file, whether
I agree with Chris and Thomas on this: the purpose of the 800 field is to
indicate the relationship of the work being described to a related work (the
series it is in). Just as the purpose of an analytical 700 is to reference a
related work (e.g., based on)
25.1.1.3 tells us there are three ways
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz
[debo...@marcofquality.com]
Sent: November-26-12 5:23 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Recording
Agreed, Chris. The MARC 800/810/811/830 already conveys the designator in series
(work) so adding the designator would be redundant. One alternative in MARC would
be to use the 7XX for related work, in which case the relationship designator WOULD be
useful:
700 1_ $i In series (work): $a
21 matches
Mail list logo
