I think the point that was being made--and with which I was agreeing--is that sometimes too much specificity isn't really that helpful. In other words, it is nice there is a higher-level designator but have we gone too far in some lower-level designators? In most cases the very specific relationship designators is/will be very helpful but when it comes to introduction, preface, afterwords, forewords it might be more helpful to have them all lumped together. Just how some of us see it. But as Adam Schiff said --in another setting--some of us are lumpers and some are splitters. In a shared cataloging environment this difference of viewpoint can cause unexpected results in our catalogs. At least the lumpers can make global changes to move terms to the higher-level designators to improve search results.
Mary L. Mastraccio Cataloging & Authorities Manager MARCIVE, Inc. San Antonio, TX 78265 1-800-531-7678 ________________________________ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of JSC Secretary Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 9:04 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Difference between Introduction and Preface You can choose the higher-level designator "writer of supplementary textual content" if you don't want to or cannot identify a more specific relationship. Judy Kuhagen JSC Secretary On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Mary Mastraccio <ma...@marcive.com<mailto:ma...@marcive.com>> wrote: Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote: Sometimes I think RDA makes too many distinctions. It would be far more sensible to have only one relationship designator covering writers of things like prefaces, introductions, forewords and afterwords. Then we wouldn't have to wreck our brains about the differences. "Writer of added text" would do the trick, if it wasn't restricted to primarily non-textual work. I agree!! Mary L. Mastraccio Cataloging & Authorities Manager MARCIVE, Inc. San Antonio, TX 78265 1-800-531-7678<tel:1-800-531-7678>
