The return of designations of function to name access points in RDA--assuming "author" is among them--could, in theory at least, make multiple-author displays possible (if that is desired in a particular context).
Ed Jones -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 7:33 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Citation styles and cataloguing standards I am still not convinced that it's necessary or desirable for the actual form of entries in the catalog to be customized for user display. If: 1) Each of the data elements that makes up those citation formats is machine-addressable in the bib record, and 2) The citation format is sufficient for a machine to follow the relationship to a destination record, then: The citation can be presented to the user as below. The citation can be presented to the user in other ways, depending on context and user community. The relationships between entities can be made navigable in the system, and also used for analysis and calculation. If, on the other hand, the "citation" were stored in a bib record exactly as written below, without being easily machine-addressable or machine-navigable--then the citation can ONLY be presented that way (now and forever; rather than the capability to flexibly display as the context calls for), and the system can't easily make the relationship recorded by the citation navigable or analyzable. It is clear to me which situation is preferable. If "citations are what users see", I think this is a failing of present systems. There's no reason that the form of data recorded in the bib record need be the form of data presented to the users--except when the data is not recorded in a sufficiently machine readable format, and it leaves the system no choice. That present systems tend to present MARC records almost as is is a failing of current systems. We desperately need to stop designing cataloging practice for failing systems, because it is the design for failing systems that puts barriers in the way of developing succesful systems, as illustrated by the example above. It's a vicious circle. Jonathan At 11:20 AM +1000 10/4/06, Hal Cain wrote: >(Posted to both Autocat and RDA-L) > >The Chicago Manual of Style, the preferred style guide for AACR2 and >similarly the draft RDA, has placed a guide to its citation styles on its >website at http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html > >Given that cataloguing and catalogues are for users, and citations (the >RDA term for a definitive reference or name for a resource) are what users >se, construct and get their information from, what should we be doing to >narrow the gap between standard catalogue records and displays and >instances such as the following (from the CMS page): > >---------- >Cowlishaw, Guy, and Robin Dunbar. Primate Conservation Biology. Chicago: >University of Chicago Press, 2000. > >Laumann, Edward O., John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael, and Stuart >Michaels. The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the >United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. > >Lattimore, Richmond, trans. The Iliad of Homer. Chicago: University of >Chicago Press, 1951. > >Kurland, Philip B., and Ralph Lerner, eds. The Founders' Constitution. >Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. >http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/. Also available in print form and >as a CD-ROM. >------------ > >Hal Cain >Joint Theological Library >Parkville, Victoria, Australia >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
