I've just joined this list and I did it so that I can ask this question.  
Please take a look at OCLC record #840606230, if you would.  This book is 
conference proceedings, and has two statements of responsibility, one for a 
compiler (i.e. editor of compilation) and one for 20 authors, which has been 
shortened in the 245 $c to one name "and 19 others."

I made what I hope are some useful additions and changes to this record, which 
was already coded as RDA, but one particular thing has got me wondering.

At first I instinctively added a 700 added access point for the lone author 
left standing in the truncated SOR, Danilo Martuccelli, because previously 
there was none.  Then it occurred to me that the "work" this book embodies is a 
compilation, and Martuccelli is in fact responsible only for one contribution 
to the compilation-i.e., one component work within the larger work.  He is not 
a co-creator of the entirety of the larger work.  (Mejia Sanabria, on the other 
hand, is of course a contributor to the entire compilation-work and his 700 is 
indubitably legitimate.)

Does this mean that Martuccelli, author of just one component work, should not 
be given a 700 added access point unless it is in fact a name/title access 
point that represents the component work for which he is responsible?  (An AAP 
for the "predominant or first work" in a compilation is said not to be required 
for conference proceedings in the LC/PCC PS for 25.1, by the way.)  Or maybe 
I'm getting too hung up worrying about "works" and the plain 700 author access 
point is just fine.

Thanks for any help!

Pete Wilson
Vanderbilt University

Reply via email to