On 8/20/13, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
20.08.2013 15:07, Mitchell, Michael:
... This is a rant
against the folly of RDA,...
I just don't understand how the profession can embrace
such folly though.
High time to figure this out indeed.
When I have mentioned that it was necessary to make
Lynn wrote:
Is there a reason we can't do something like this for graphic novels and the
like:
1 volume of illustrations ; some color or 138 pages of illustrations ; some
color
I haven't gone through the RDA rules in depth like many of you, but 3.4.12.1
says to give the number of units
Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:19 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Lynn wrote:
Is there a reason we can't do something like this for graphic
20.08.2013 15:07, Mitchell, Michael:
The fact that RDA rules create a conundrum like this regarding what
should be a simple line of description has got to be one of the most
ridiculous examples of why this whole set of rules will be just
another (big) nail in our professional coffins. The public
Of Mitchell, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:08 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
The fact that RDA rules create a conundrum like this regarding what should be a
simple line of description has got to be one of the most ridiculous examples
at brazosport.edu
-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: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 2:19 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustration
Lynn Gates posted:
Is there a reason we can't do something like this for graphic novels and
the like:
1 volume of illustrations ; some color or 138 pages of illustrations ; some
color
Perhaps because the unit name for a volume with page numbers is pages?
I would prefer for a graphic novel:
Heidrun Wiesenmuller wrote (in part):
Personally, I'm much in favour of the policy of the British Library and
Cambridge University Library: If I've understood correctly, they simply
go on using chiefly and all, ignoring the restrictions to 7.15.
Sad to say, I had completely missed the
Envoyé : 15 août 2013 17:45
À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Greta de Groat said:
... so i think you are stuck with 300 photographs.
I've never seen a coffee table book with actual photographs on
sensitive paper. Also, the pages may be numbered
Mac said:
I would consider architectural drawings to be plans, not maps,
regardless of scale. Maps usually depict the earth's surface. There
are also maps of the moon, and of fictitious places, etc.
Yes, but not all architectural drawings are plans (e.g. if the drawing
shows the front of a
-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Greta de Groat said:
... so i think you are stuck with 300 photographs.
I've never seen a coffee table book with actual photographs on
sensitive paper. Also, the pages may be numbered, with a varying
numbers of pictures per page
d'origine-
De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Envoyé : 15 août 2013 15:33
À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Greta said:
I thought
/ Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Envoyé : 15 août 2013 15:08
À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Francis,
I believe RDA could be altered to make a clearer distinction between
Heidrun said:
I think we'll have to discuss that for the German application. Judging
from the discussion here and some examples I've seen, I'm not so sure
this rule has been universally followed (although I see your point).
Even the AACR2 glossary does not have a definition of photograph.
Many thanks to Steven, John, Mac and Adam. As usual, the discussion has
been very helpful. I wonder what would I do without this list?
Things have been cleared up a lot. As samples isn't so very common, I
think it might be a good idea to take it out from the list under
Alternative (where it
] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
[...]
By the way: I noticed that there doesn't seem to be an equivalent in RDA for
AACR2 2.5C5.: If the publication consists wholly or predominantly of
illustrations, give all ill. or chiefly ill., as appropriate. I find this
rather unsatisfactory because illustrations
Francis,
If a resource consists wholly or predominantly of image content, then this content is no
longer illustrative. That is, the images *are the primary content* in such a resource, so
they no longer fulfill RDA's definition of illustrative content: Content designed
to illustrate the
There is a difference between content type and illustrative content.
Content type is at a higher level. It refers to the way a work (an idea) is
realized. It could be text, still image, and so forth. I would say that it
actually refers to the major content, the fundamental form a work is
and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 9:55 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Francis,
If a resource consists wholly or predominantly
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:54:56 +0200, Heidrun Wiesenmüller
wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de wrote:
Francis,
If a resource consists wholly or predominantly of image content, then this
content is no longer illustrative. That is, the images *are the primary
content* in such a resource, so they no
Kathie wrote:
I brought up this very issue last month in a thread titled Volumes containing only
images. I only received one reply. (From Mac, pragmatic as always.) I'm not sure if
URLs work to link threads in this format, but it is here:
-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 9:55 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
Francis,
If a resource consists wholly or predominantly of image content, then this content is no
longer illustrative
Heidrun said:
The difference between maps and plans is indeed one of scale, I believe.
I would consider architectural drawings to be plans, not maps,
regardless of scale. Maps usually depict the earth's surface. There
are also maps of the moon, and of fictitious places, etc.
For the forms, I
Francis,
I believe RDA could be altered to make a clearer distinction between extent of
carrier and extent of content. The proposal for an Extent of Expression element
is one of the key components of a discussion paper (on machine-actionable data)
to be brought before JSC later this year:
Greta said:
I thought that if we decided something was a still image rather than
text, that we were required to use the list of still image carriers
for the extent at RDA 3.4.4.2. In that case, neither pages nor volume
are in that list, so i think you are stuck with 300 photographs.
Good
Greta de Groat said:
... so i think you are stuck with 300 photographs.
I've never seen a coffee table book with actual photographs on
sensitive paper. Also, the pages may be numbered, with a varying
numbers of pictures per page, but the pictures not numbered.
If one is uncomfortable with
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some of the
terms for the various kinds of illustrations in 7.15 (in German
cataloging, we only distinguish four kinds of illustrations). The German
RDA translation isn't much help either.
So, could anybody help with my questions?
1.
Wiesenmüller
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:47 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some of the terms for
the various kinds of illustrations in 7.15 (in German cataloging, we only
distinguish
and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun
Wiesenmüller
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 14:47
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some
Heidrun asked:
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some of the
terms for the various kinds of illustrations ...
I don't pretend to understand RDA's use of words, but this is how I'm
asking SLC cataloguers to use them.
1. charts vs. graphs:
Graphs usually compare
In answering Heidrun:
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some of the
terms for the various kinds of illustrations ...
I neglected to mention samples.
Steven got it right I think. While paint chips may be the most
common, fabric swatches also happen (e.g., clan
: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3
I find it really difficult to understand what is meant by some of the terms
for the various kinds of illustrations in 7.15 (in German cataloging, we only
distinguish four kinds of illustrations). The German RDA translation isn't
much help either.
So
32 matches
Mail list logo
