I would assume that 'signatory to a treaty' will be a heading much like
the 100 headings. That is, to me it's an entity, although we've always
represented it as a semi-controlled string instead.
Jonathan
Karen Coyle wrote:
Quoting John Attig <[email protected]>:
"Signatory to a treaty, etc." is therefore one of several identifying
elements necessary to distinguish between different treaties (works).
This is independent of the role of the signatories as creators of the
work. Note in the authority record example, that Australia and United
States are also identified as creators -- and presumably, in a linked
data environment, this would be encoded as a relationship to the
corporate bodies.
So is it expected that "signatory to a treaty" will be represented by
an entity or a string? For example, would you expect a signatory to a
treaty to be retrieved by non-preferred (or earlier/later) forms of
the name?
Also, if a system could precoordinate the string using an entity and
relationship (thus having it appear as it must in RDA displays and
indexes) would that be acceptable?
kc
The way in which RDA elements are combined into precoordinated access
points is one of the features of RDA that does not fit terribly well
into the linked-data environment that we are anticipating, but it is a
critical component to how we currently control and provide access to
the entities in question -- particularly in the case of works and
expressions.
John Attig
Authority Control Librarian
Penn State University
[email protected]
