Thank you very much Rebecca, Karen and Esme for your replies. It is really a privilege to be able to ask a question here and get answers like these.
Regarding the DC Creator issue, I probably nave a different perspective on DC than many here, because my first contact with DC was not as a librarian but as a content management specialist. In the content management community DC is widely adopted, but a lot (most) of the metadata one finds in a CMS is new, born digital and often created by users directly inside the system itself (think of a blog post). Also, in a CMS most metadata is generated by users without any knowledge of cataloging best practices, so the simplicity of unqualified DC is adequate. These factors make it very desirable to have a simple Creator attribute, which is often a very important search criteria for users. That is why I found it strange that LC chose not to map any tag to Creator. Now with my librarian hat on, and your explanations, the reasoning is very clear. Thanks a lot! Cheers, Luciano On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Guenther, Rebecca <r...@loc.gov> wrote: > The reason we used DC Contributor instead of Creator is because the semantics > do not map well to MARC creators/contributors. Creators in MARC can be in 1XX > and 7XX; since 1XX is not repeatable, additional creators go in 7XX. > Contributors in Dublin Core play a secondary role in the resource ("An entity > responsible for making contributions to the resource.") vs. Creator ("An > entity primarily responsible for making the resource.").If we simply mapped > the name in 1XX to Creator and the name in 7XX to Contributor, these may or > may not be correct in terms of semantics. In MARC primary vs. secondary > contributions are not what distinguish recording in 1XX vs 7XX, but the > particular contribution that was made may be included in the role subfield > ($e in textual form or $4 in coded form). Unfortunately we find that many > MARC records do not record the role, but that is because of previous > cataloging policy, not anything in MARC. Another point is that whether the > contribution is prim! ar! > y or secondary may vary depending on the type of material, so giving the > specific contribution may be more useful in the long run (for instance, an > illustrator may be considered a secondary contribution in the book world, but > if the resource is in a museum it may be considered the primary contribution). > > It might be noted that some time ago (the year that the DC conference was in > Florence, I can't remember exactly when that was) the Dublin Core Usage Board > (of which I was then a member) attempted to combine creator and contributor > (and publisher) to become one DC element (Agent), but implementers objected > to it, so the proposal was withdrawn. But that was recognition that the > distinction being made might not have been the best way to go. That was also > a factor in mapping MARC to DC this way. > > Rebecca > > Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:35:35 -0700 > From: "Cowles, Esme" <escow...@ucsd.edu> > Subject: Re: Why does the MARC to DC crosswalk refuse to use Creator? > > It looks like it's using Contributor instead. So I'm guessing the sticking > point is that it's hard to figure out what Contributors are primary, so it's > safer to just punt and put them all in Contributor instead. > > -Esme > -- > Esme Cowles <escow...@ucsd.edu> > > "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in > creating the Internet." -- Al Gore > > On Apr 18, 2011, at 5:13 PM, Luciano Ramalho wrote: > >> I am mystified by the discovery that the MARC to DC Crosswalk does not >> map *any* MARC tag to the DC Creator element! >> >> http://www.loc.gov/marc/marc2dc.html >> >> Does anyone know the reasoning behind this strange decision? >> >> -- >> Luciano Ramalho >> programador repentista || stand-up programmer >> Twitter: @luciano > > Rebecca S. Guenther > Senior Networking and Standards Specialist > Network Development and MARC Standards Office > Library of Congress > 101 Independence Ave SE > Washington, DC 20540 > +1 202 707 5092 (voice) > +1 202 707 0115 (fax) > r...@loc.gov > -- Luciano Ramalho programador repentista || stand-up programmer Twitter: @luciano