Thomas,
What you said about films is not quite totally correct. Appendix I does
have a relationship designator under creator of work:
filmmaker A person, family, or corporate body responsible for creating an
independent or personal film. A filmmaker is individually responsible for
the conception and execution of all aspects of the film.
For a very small subset of films, if one person/family/corporate body were
responsible for all aspects, that entity would be the creator of the work
and the film would be named using the combination of Creater/Preferred
title. This is most likely to happen for student works and home movies, I
imagine. If you think of all of those YouTube videos where someone points
a camera at themselves and just talks to the camera, I think that would be
a case that would fall under the designator "filmmaker".
Adam
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[email protected]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On Mon, 13 May 2013, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
If an "other" person/family/corporate body associated with the work is used to
construct the authorized access point representing the work, then that *one* person,
family or corporate body associated with the work is the core element.
Another way to state this is to say whoever became the main entry in AACR2 is a core element value
in RDA (the instructions for authorized access points for works in RDA 6.27-6.31 are where one
finds the equivalent to AACR2 main entry rules). Only one person, family or corporate body is
chosen for that spot, whether it's a "creator" or an "other associated with the
work."
In MARC terms, what RDA 18.3 is saying is that the name found in the 1XX field
is the core element, but names found in 7XX fields are not core elements.
Interestingly, for moving image works like movies, there is no core relationship element. All
persons or corporate bodies associated with the work when it comes to movies fall under the element
"Other Person, Family or Corporate Body Associated with the Work" (examples: film
director, film producer). There are none that fall under the "Creator" element.
But because the authorized access point for a moving image work is formed only
with the preferred title (RDA 6.27.1.3) then there is no person or corporate
body that becomes part of the authorized access point for a moving image work.
Therefore, the director or producer for a moving image work are not core
elements.
In other words, in the case of a movie, there may be several people that fall under the
element "Other Person, Family or Corporate Body Associated with the Work" but
not a single one of them becomes a core element because none of them are used to form the
authorized access point for the movie.
Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joan Wang
Sent: May-13-13 1:21 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [RDA-L] authorized access point for person/family/corporate body
Hi, all
I have two questions about authorized access points for person/family/corporate
body.
Q1:
RDA 18.3 says that creator is a core element. If there is more than one, only the
principle or the first-named creator is required. It also says that other
person/family/corporate body associated with a work is a core element (if the access
point representing that person/family/ corporate body is used to construct the authorized
access point representing the work). But it does not mention the situation of "more
than one". I assume that we can follow the requirement for creator if there is more
than one person/family/corporate body associated with a work other than a creator.
