Just to add some other details on this topic and the relationship designator 
“reproduction of (manifestation)” under the broader designator of “equivalent 
manifestation” (a manifestation embodying the same expression of a work – which 
covers manifestations in different font sizes of the same expression)…


LC-PCC PS 27.1

“Related manifestation is a core element for LC and PCC for reproductions.

The word “reproduction” is being used in its broadest sense to include all 
resources formerly identified as reproductions, republications, reprints, 
reissues, facsimiles, etc., that still represent equivalent content between an 
original resource and a reproduction of that original. Revised editions 
represent different expressions and are not treated as reproductions.”


and

LC-PCC PS 27.1.1.3

“Note: The PCC is in the process of forming a task group to address issues 
related to reproductions.”



Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam Schiff
Sent: November-18-13 3:36 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] reprint relationships

Agreed, Trina.  As long as the text of the regular print and large print is 
identical, they are the same expression, but different manifestations.  In my 
particular case, the original regular print from 2003 had about 500 pages, 
while the large print had over 700.  Different places of publication, 
publishers, years.  But they are identical in content otherwise.  Hence, same 
expression, different manifestations.  If “reprint of (manifestation)” is not 
the appropriate relationship designator to use (anyone want to comment on 
this?), then we need something else, like perhaps “large print manifestation 
of” or something similar.

Adam

Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
Seattle, WA

From: Trina Pundurs<mailto:tpund...@library.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2013 7:48 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] reprint relationships

Well, I stepped in it on this one.  Rereading the FRBR report 
(http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf) I see that 
regular-print and large print can most certainly be the same expression.  So 
that brings us back around to Adam's original question.  It would seem some 
tweaking of Appendix J is needed no matter what!
Trina

On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 7:12 PM, Trina Pundurs 
<tpund...@library.berkeley.edu<mailto:tpund...@library.berkeley.edu>> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Adam L. Schiff 
<asch...@u.washington.edu<mailto:asch...@u.washington.edu>> wrote:
In RDA Appendix J "reprinted as" and "reprint of (manifestation)" are listed 
hierarchically under "reproduced as" and "reproduction of (manifestation)".  I 
have a 2010 large print edition of a book originally published in 2003.  The 
manifestation in hand says "This optimized ReadHowYouWant edition contains the 
complete, unabridged text of the original publisher's edition. Other aspects of 
the book may vary from the original edition."

I was considering including a 775 field in the RDA record for the large print 
with the relationship designator "reprint of (manifestation)" and a description 
of the 2003 edition.  However large print editions are not reproductions, so 
the placement of "reprinted as (manifestation)" hierarchically under 
"reproduction of (manifestation)" seems suspect to me.

Reprints are clearly equivalent manifestations, but not necessarily 
reproductions.  Shouldn't "reprinted as" and "reprint of (manifestation)" be 
taken out of the reproduction hierarchies in Appendix J?

Hi Adam,
I believe the problem here is the mighty misleading wording of the definition 
of "reprint of (manifestation)" in App. J--in particular, the choice of the 
phrase "same content".  If you look at the definition of the reciprocal term, 
"reprinted as", you will see that reprints must be the *same expression*.
And since editions are different expressions, then your large print edition is 
not a reprint, even if the content is the same.  It is a different expression, 
but the same work, as the original book; the relationship of the large print 
edition to the regular-print original would be captured by the AAP for the work 
(100+245, or however it pans out for this particular resource).

That's my take on it, anyway.
Trina

Trina Pundurs
Serials Cataloger
Library Collection Services
University of California, Berkeley
tpund...@library.berkeley.edu<mailto:tpund...@library.berkeley.edu>
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/
Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1990

Reply via email to