12.12.2013 15:28, Bernadette O'Reilly:
The Bodleian Libraries and Oxford Library Information System are
pleased to be able to make their inhouse RDA documentation publicly
available at http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/our-work/cataloguing. It
includes brief transfer training materials for experienced
cataloguers and comprehensive materials for training from scratch and
for reference, all available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
license.
While we have nothing to criticize in these materials, and applaud the
effort and making the materials freely available, we are disappointed
to notice that in the paper for multiparts:
http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/159660/M6-Multipart.pdf
only the options of "comprehensive description" and "analytical
description" are considered, the "hierarchical description",
however, not even getting mentioned. (RDA 1.1.4) We have reason
to believe this will be not just a Bodleian quirk.
In Germany, the "hierarchical description" is the only one we are
doing and have always done, consisting of a record for the work as a
whole plus one record each for every part, carrying a link to the work
record.
This option in 1.1.4 seems to be, or so we think, the only one that
consistently "brings together what belongs togeter", namely, all the
parts of a work and their various editions.
If now, based on MARC heritage (AACR also had the hierarchic option!),
nobody in MARCistan is ever going to do hierarchic descriptions,
then this deplorable incompatibility is going to be perpetuated.
The part-whole relationship, in other words, will continue to be
given short shrift. In FRBRland, this can only be seen as a
misguided anachronism, and this despite even MARC is able to do better.
B.Eversberg
To unsubscribe from RDA-L send an e-mail to the following address from the
address you are subscribed under to:
lists...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
In the body of the message:
SIGNOFF RDA-L
