[mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca]
Sent: 10 May 2013 19:47
To: Meehan, Thomas
Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Abridging statement of responsibility
Thomas Meehan asked:
2. Statements of responsibility naming more than three persons
(2.4.1= .5).
Only the first is core, and must
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of JSC Secretary
Sent: Friday, May 10, 2013 11:22 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Abridging statement of responsibility
Tom,
One of the changes in the May 14 release of the RDA Toolkit will be a revision
of the core statement at 2.4
Jim,
The element being discussed is the Statement of responsibility relating to
title proper (RDA 2.4.2). So, before you get to this element, you have
already selected the title proper. Then, you follow 2.4.2.4: If a
statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source
of
For a further wrinkle, I would also suggest to all that the next time you watch
a movie, look at the credits and try to ascertain what the first statement is.
And for extra credit, you can then figure out which of those are identifying
creators of the intellectual or artistic content
Greta de
Andrea Leigh said:
Yep. This makes recording statement of responsibility for DVDs even
more straightforward-- NOT.
Some during the test period interpreted RDA to mean DVDs have no
statement of responsibility (apart from a film by Tom Jones). with
all noncast credits in 508. Motion pictures,
Dear Judy,
Since retiring in 2003 I have not been closely following discussions of
RDA. It seems to me that in some cases first statement of responsibility will
be difficult or impossible to ascertain. I do not think it is far-fetched it
imagine: 1. A bilingual text with one right-to-left
JSC Secretary wrote:
The last paragraph of 2.4.2.3 says:
If not all statements of responsibility appearing on the source or
sources of information are being recorded, give preference to those
identifying creators of the intellectual or artistic content. In case
of doubt, record the first
I think you are right. The last option in RDA is a melding of AACR2 and
RDA.
The original omission of Dr., for instance, had to do with the fact that
the title did not add very much to essence of the area of responsibility
(essence is a word may not be quite the correct word here).
On Fri, May
Mac Elrod wrote:
The major change is that we now may include data formerly omitted, but
as with much in RDA, options abound. When in doubt, I suggest
including, apart from affiliations. There is a field in the authority
record for affiliations; they don't have to be in each bibliographic
Heidrun said:
I've been wondering: Which statement would be core in the case of an
edited collection, when you have one statement naming the editors and
another one naming the people who have contributed?
SLC preferes to record the editors in 245/$c, but the contributing
authors in 505 and
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
Sent: May-11-13 2:01 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Abridging statement of responsibility
Heidrun
Thomas,
It's probably even less complicated than that.
The name of the specific RDA element under discussion is Statement of
responsibility relating to title proper which means a statement listing authors for
separately titled pieces within the resource is not likely related to the title
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun
Wiesenmüller
Sent: May-11-13 4:31 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Abridging statement of responsibility
Dear all,
This is a fairly novice question but one where I would welcome some
clarification, especially as far as the RDA text goes. Apologies if this has
been raised before (I'm sure it must have been). I am looking at a couple of
contentious aspects of the statement of responsibility
Tom,
One of the changes in the May 14 release of the RDA Toolkit will be a
revision of the core statement at 2.4 to add information there that is now
at 2.4.2:
Statement of responsibility relating to title proper is a core element (if
more than one, only the first recorded is required). Other
Thomas Meehan asked:
1. Which (or how many) statements of responsibility are to be regarde=
d as core.
The first only. But I suspect most will record all, or at least the first
person in each grouping, as well as trace them.
2. Statements of responsibility naming more than three
16 matches
Mail list logo
