For the "Work manifested" example in
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC_RDA_Complete_Examples_%28Bibliographic%29_Revised_2012.pdf
there are some useful distinctions that can be made to facilitate a discussion
of this topic.
It is correct that one Creator element and one Title proper element can
Heidrun said:
>Maybe. But think of all the money and resources which has already been
>gone into RDA. Makes you wonder why it shouldn't be possible to invest
>some of it into an open source solution which would be available to all...
>But then, of course, this was mere fantasizing :-(
Certainly I
A news announcement (http://www.rda-jsc.org/2012possibleproposals.html)
lists possible and submitted proposals for revision of RDA. The list will
be updated when information about other possible proposals is available.
The following proposals submitted by the American Library Association have
bee
Mac said:
Unless there is two tier linkage, i.e., the work authority record
access points in turn would consist of name authority RSNs (UTLAS
speak for record sequence, i.e., control, numbers), one stop updating
of name access points would not be possible. Each work authority
record would requ
Heidrun said:
>In German library systems, we're used to linking authority records
>(mostly for persons and corporate bodies) to bibliographic records,
>using the authority control numbers as identifiers.
As did UTLAS decades ago.
>It would, on principle, also be possible to have an authority r
ALA ALCTS CaMMS RDA Conference Forums and Programs Taskforce Forums at ALA
Annual 2012
Name of Forum:
RDA Update Forum
Brief Description:
Please join us on Saturday, June 23, 2012 8:00-10:00 (ACC-304AB) for the The
Cataloging and Metadata Management Section (CaMMS) RDA Conference Forums and
P
The Cataloging & Metadata Management Section invites you to a forum on
reimaging the library catalog.
CaMMS Forum
When: Friday, June 22, 2012 - 1:30 to 3:30pm Pacific Daylight Time*
Location:Anaheim Convention Center, Room 209B
Online https://www1.gotomeeting.com/registe
Am 04.06.2012 16:22, schrieb Karen Coyle:
Heidrun, the difference I see between the current practice is that
currently we can link between bibliographic and authority *records* --
while FRBR requires us to link between *entities*. The entities in
FRBR have a somewhat different break-down to our
Thanks to everyone who has sent advice or clarifications. I think that
my colleagues and I can avoid this issue much of the time by following
the LCPS at 6.27.3 and creating expression-level access points only for
translations and dates of Works (although this is perhaps not quite in
the spirit of
I have to apologize for posting to this group an internal message. I guess it
is Monday!
Since I am writing now instead of being quiet, I want to send a huge Thank You
to everyone that does participate because I learn so much from each of you.
Thank you,
Deborah
__
Heidrun, the difference I see between the current practice is that
currently we can link between bibliographic and authority *records* --
while FRBR requires us to link between *entities*. The entities in FRBR
have a somewhat different break-down to our authority data (for example
our authority
Cynthia,
FYI: Maybe this is something for our reference collection. There is a new
edition of Arlene Taylor's Organization of Information (2008).
http://www.amazon.com/Organization-Information-Library-Science-Series/dp/159158700X
We have 1999, and 2004. The 2008 ed. is referred to below in
Karen,
not necessarily, I believe.
In German library systems, we're used to linking authority records
(mostly for persons and corporate bodies) to bibliographic records,
using the authority control numbers as identifiers. The systems are able
to extract information stored in the authority rec
13 matches
Mail list logo
