[RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
I think this angle didn't come up in the previous thread. If so, I apologize in advance. Under AACR2, we were not to apply a conventional collective title to a collection of works like poems or short stories that had a distinctive title proper. I'm wondering if people will continue to observe this rule (as a rule of thumb, perhaps?). Piece in hand. Title proper: There once lived a girl who seduced her sister's husband and he hanged himself Conventional Collective Title: Short Stories. English. Selections. 2013 The title proper is certainly distinctive, and there is no name-title authority record that records the relationship of the conventional collective title to the work (the collection), but I find the conventional collective title in the bibliographic record. RDA 6.2.2.10.3 doesn't seem to speak to this issue, and the LC PCC PS is about whether to give authorized access points for the subordinate parts, not for what to do with the preferred title of the collection as far as I can tell. Thanks -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Adger, It is still possible to identify such a collection (compilation) by a distinctive title. The justification is found in the 1st sentence at 6.2.2.10: If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.4 document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2060#rda6-2060–6.2.2.5 document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2146#rda6-2146. The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Cheers, Casey On 3/21/2013 5:15 AM, Adger Williams wrote: I think this angle didn't come up in the previous thread. If so, I apologize in advance. Under AACR2, we were not to apply a conventional collective title to a collection of works like poems or short stories that had a distinctive title proper. I'm wondering if people will continue to observe this rule (as a rule of thumb, perhaps?). Piece in hand. Title proper: There once lived a girl who seduced her sister's husband and he hanged himself Conventional Collective Title: Short Stories. English. Selections. 2013 The title proper is certainly distinctive, and there is no name-title authority record that records the relationship of the conventional collective title to the work (the collection), but I find the conventional collective title in the bibliographic record. RDA 6.2.2.10.3 doesn't seem to speak to this issue, and the LC PCC PS is about whether to give authorized access points for the subordinate parts, not for what to do with the preferred title of the collection as far as I can tell. Thanks -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu mailto:awilli...@colgate.edu -- Casey A. Mullin Head, Data Control Unit Metadata Department Stanford University Libraries 650-736-0849 cmul...@stanford.edu http://www.caseymullin.com -- Those who need structured and granular data and the precise retrieval that results from it to carry out research and scholarship may constitute an elite minority rather than most of the people of the world (sadly), but that talented and intelligent minority is an important one for the cultural and technological advancement of humanity. It is even possible that if we did a better job of providing access to such data, we might enable the enlargement of that minority. -Martha Yee
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Casey Mullin said, regarding 6.2.2.10: The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. I don't understand why new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Could you elaborate? Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edumailto:k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Hm. If something has to be known by its title to avoid getting a conventional collective title, doesn't that imply a certain amount of exposure to the public before the time of cataloguing in order for people to become familiar with the resource (get to know it)? (Certainly, there aren't going to be citations in reference sources to a new publication). (This was where the distinctive title notion from AACR2 made sense. You could guess that There once was a girl who... would be remembered, whereas, new and collected poems might not.) So, is this provision just a grandfather clause to keep us from having to go back and change thousands of records? On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Casey A Mullin cmul...@stanford.eduwrote: Adger, It is still possible to identify such a collection (compilation) by a distinctive title. The justification is found in the 1st sentence at 6.2.2.10: If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources, apply the instructions at 6.2.2.4 http://document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2060#rda6-2060– 6.2.2.5 http://document.php?id=rdachp6target=rda6-2146#rda6-2146. The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Cheers, Casey On 3/21/2013 5:15 AM, Adger Williams wrote: I think this angle didn't come up in the previous thread. If so, I apologize in advance. Under AACR2, we were not to apply a conventional collective title to a collection of works like poems or short stories that had a distinctive title proper. I'm wondering if people will continue to observe this rule (as a rule of thumb, perhaps?). Piece in hand. Title proper: There once lived a girl who seduced her sister's husband and he hanged himself Conventional Collective Title: Short Stories. English. Selections. 2013 The title proper is certainly distinctive, and there is no name-title authority record that records the relationship of the conventional collective title to the work (the collection), but I find the conventional collective title in the bibliographic record. RDA 6.2.2.10.3 doesn't seem to speak to this issue, and the LC PCC PS is about whether to give authorized access points for the subordinate parts, not for what to do with the preferred title of the collection as far as I can tell. Thanks -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Casey A. Mullin Head, Data Control Unit Metadata Department Stanford University Libraries650-736-0849 cmullin@stanford.eduhttp://www.caseymullin.com -- Those who need structured and granular data and the precise retrieval that results from it to carry out research and scholarship may constitute an elite minority rather than most of the people of the world (sadly), but that talented and intelligent minority is an important one for the cultural and technological advancement of humanity. It is even possible that if we did a better job of providing access to such data, we might enable the enlargement of that minority. -Martha Yee -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
I'm not sure if I'm reading RDA correctly here, but I'm going to paraphrase what I think RDA is saying: 6.2.2.10: If the compilation is known by a distinctive title already, go ahead and use that as the preferred title (i.e., 240 if necessary). Otherwise: 6.2.2.10.1: If the compilation is a collection of all of the authors works, give *Works *as the preferred title. 6.2.2.10.2: If the compilation is a collection of all of the authors works in a single form, give the that as the preferred title. (i.e.*Short stories* ) 6.2.2.10.3: If the compliation is selections of the author's works, then give access to those works in analytical entries OR (reading the * Alternative*) identify the work with a conventional collective title (as above; Selections, Plays, Essays, etc.) with *Selections *appended (you may also give analytical added entries for the individual works as well) I read LC's PCC PS at this point as saying Choose this alternate way: Instead of giving each work it's own analytical added entry, add a Conventional collective title (Such as Short Stories. Selections. English) plus ONE authorized access point for the first or major work that's included in this compilation I'm still a bit confused by that example as to how to give access to the compiled works: Is the first example two works only in one volume and they use the first work as the 240 and the second with a 700(12)? Not sure. But anyway, that's how I read it, and it would help explain why your collection, with a distinctive title, gets a Conventional Collective Title. ~Leigh Billings On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: I think this angle didn't come up in the previous thread. If so, I apologize in advance. Under AACR2, we were not to apply a conventional collective title to a collection of works like poems or short stories that had a distinctive title proper. I'm wondering if people will continue to observe this rule (as a rule of thumb, perhaps?). Piece in hand. Title proper: There once lived a girl who seduced her sister's husband and he hanged himself Conventional Collective Title: Short Stories. English. Selections. 2013 The title proper is certainly distinctive, and there is no name-title authority record that records the relationship of the conventional collective title to the work (the collection), but I find the conventional collective title in the bibliographic record. RDA 6.2.2.10.3 doesn't seem to speak to this issue, and the LC PCC PS is about whether to give authorized access points for the subordinate parts, not for what to do with the preferred title of the collection as far as I can tell. Thanks -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Leigh Billings (redn...@umich.edu) Information Resources Cataloging Specialist Slavic, East European Eurasian Division of Area Programs University of Michigan Library 111-C North Hatcher Graduate Library 913 S. University Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1190 (734) 647-3819
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
To me, it has to do with the phrases known by and resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources; these imply that the compilation as a work in its own right has been around for awhile, and with that particular title. YMMV, of course. Casey On 3/21/2013 10:08 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: Casey Mullin said, regarding 6.2.2.10: The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. I don't understand why new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Could you elaborate? Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu mailto:k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! -- Casey A. Mullin Head, Data Control Unit Metadata Department Stanford University Libraries 650-736-0849 cmul...@stanford.edu http://www.caseymullin.com -- Those who need structured and granular data and the precise retrieval that results from it to carry out research and scholarship may constitute an elite minority rather than most of the people of the world (sadly), but that talented and intelligent minority is an important one for the cultural and technological advancement of humanity. It is even possible that if we did a better job of providing access to such data, we might enable the enlargement of that minority. -Martha Yee
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
The way I read If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources that means that any brand-spanking-new publication which happens to be a compilation would meet that condition. Unless you're arguing that Stephen King's latest collection of short stories and Natasha Trethewey's latest collection of poems are not known by the titles appearing on the title pages and covers, and by which people look for them in bookstores and libraries. I don't see anything implying that a resource needs to sit around and age for any period of time before it is known by a title. I think the access points resulting from 6.2.2.10 are quite valuable to aid the FRBR user task of Find, but I think using them as the AAP makes things more difficult for the Identify and Select tasks. They really should be variant access points, IMO. Kevin From: Casey A Mullin [mailto:cmul...@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:24 PM To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access Cc: Kevin M Randall Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) To me, it has to do with the phrases known by and resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources; these imply that the compilation as a work in its own right has been around for awhile, and with that particular title. YMMV, of course. Casey On 3/21/2013 10:08 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: Casey Mullin said, regarding 6.2.2.10: The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. I don't understand why new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Could you elaborate? Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edumailto:k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! -- Casey A. Mullin Head, Data Control Unit Metadata Department Stanford University Libraries 650-736-0849 cmul...@stanford.edumailto:cmul...@stanford.edu http://www.caseymullin.com -- Those who need structured and granular data and the precise retrieval that results from it to carry out research and scholarship may constitute an elite minority rather than most of the people of the world (sadly), but that talented and intelligent minority is an important one for the cultural and technological advancement of humanity. It is even possible that if we did a better job of providing access to such data, we might enable the enlargement of that minority. -Martha Yee
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Catalogers at UCSD are in full agreement with Kevin on this point and UCSD raised this issue on PCC-List with regards to LC’s decision that they will always be using a collective title for works like this. UCSD is concerned also with LC’s further policy decision that they will not differentiate such collective titles, e.g. a compilation of poems by author x issued in 2011 and one issued in 2012 would both get exactly the same AAP, “author x. Poems. Selections” We find this contrary to RDA since 6.27.1.9 (and its policy statement) tells us to differentiate all access points for works. It’s not very useful to catalogers or users (our public services staff has already noticed these and would like them removed) and we would like to see the policy reconsidered. Adolfo R. Tarango Head – UC Systemwide Collection Services atara...@ucsd.edumailto:atara...@ucsd.edu 858-822-3594 [cid:image001.png@01CD877F.99FB9310] From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:38 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) The way I read If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources that means that any brand-spanking-new publication which happens to be a compilation would meet that condition. Unless you're arguing that Stephen King's latest collection of short stories and Natasha Trethewey's latest collection of poems are not known by the titles appearing on the title pages and covers, and by which people look for them in bookstores and libraries. I don't see anything implying that a resource needs to sit around and age for any period of time before it is known by a title. I think the access points resulting from 6.2.2.10 are quite valuable to aid the FRBR user task of Find, but I think using them as the AAP makes things more difficult for the Identify and Select tasks. They really should be variant access points, IMO. Kevin From: Casey A Mullin [mailto:cmul...@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:24 PM To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access Cc: Kevin M Randall Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) To me, it has to do with the phrases known by and resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources; these imply that the compilation as a work in its own right has been around for awhile, and with that particular title. YMMV, of course. Casey On 3/21/2013 10:08 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: Casey Mullin said, regarding 6.2.2.10: The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. I don't understand why new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Could you elaborate? Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edumailto:k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978! -- Casey A. Mullin Head, Data Control Unit Metadata Department Stanford University Libraries 650-736-0849 cmul...@stanford.edumailto:cmul...@stanford.edu http://www.caseymullin.com -- Those who need structured and granular data and the precise retrieval that results from it to carry out research and scholarship may constitute an elite minority rather than most of the people of the world (sadly), but that talented and intelligent minority is an important one for the cultural and technological advancement of humanity. It is even possible that if we did a better job of providing access to such data, we might enable the enlargement of that minority. -Martha Yee inline: image001.png
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Excellent point, Adolfo.
I believe that particular LC-PCC PS was written before
"Selections" was re-framed as a work attribute. At that time,
"Poems. Selections" was an undifferentiated _expression_ access
point.
And to Kevin's point, what gets me about this particular sentence
is its use of plurals, which influences the cataloger's thinking
more than it perhaps ought to? Perhaps if it read "If a compilation of works is
known by a title that is used in one or more resources
embodying that compilation or in one or more reference
sources", I might read it very differently. Then there's
still the "known by" bit. Known to whom? The cataloger holding it
in hand? How long must an entity be around before it is "known by
... a title"???
I sense a revision proposal and/or LC-PCC PS is needed for this.
Otherwise, the community could just go around and around on this
issue ad infinitum.
Casey
On 3/21/2013 2:55 PM, Tarango, Adolfo wrote:
Catalogers
at UCSD are in full agreement with Kevin on this point and
UCSD raised this issue on PCC-List with regards to LC’s
decision that they will always be using a collective title
for works like this. UCSD is concerned also with LC’s
further policy decision that they will not differentiate
such collective titles, e.g. a compilation of poems by
author x issued in 2011 and one issued in 2012 would both
get exactly the same AAP, “author x. Poems. Selections” We
find this contrary to RDA since 6.27.1.9 (and its policy
statement) tells us to differentiate all access points for
works. It’s not very useful to catalogers or users (our
public services staff has already noticed these and would
like them removed) and we would like to see the policy
reconsidered.
Adolfo
R. Tarango
Head
– UC Systemwide Collection Services
atara...@ucsd.edu
858-822-3594
From:
Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On
Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:38 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about "conventional
collective titles" (6.2.2.10.3)
The
way I read "If a compilation of works
is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that
compilation or in reference sources" that
means that any brand-spanking-new publication which happens
to be a compilation would meet that condition. Unless
you're arguing that Stephen King's latest collection of
short stories and Natasha Trethewey's latest collection of
poems are not known by the titles appearing on the title
pages and covers, and by which people look for them in
bookstores and libraries. I don't see anything implying
that a resource needs to sit around and age for any period
of time before it is "known by a title".
I
think the access points resulting from 6.2.2.10 are quite
valuable to aid the FRBR user task of "Find", but I think
using them as the AAP makes things more difficult for the
"Identify" and "Select" tasks. They really should be
variant access points, IMO.
Kevin
From:
Casey A Mullin [mailto:cmul...@stanford.edu]
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:24 PM
To: Resource Description and Access / Resource
Description and Access
Cc: Kevin M Randall
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about
"conventional collective titles" (6.2.2.10.3)
To me, it has to do with the phrases
"known by" and "resources embodying that compilation or in
reference sources"; these imply that the compilation as a
work in its own right has been around for awhile, and with
that particular title.
YMMV, of course.
Casey
On 3/21/2013 10:08 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote:
Casey
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Re known by and for how long. The point I was trying to make in my last post was that for most modern publications, the title appearing on the title page and cover is the one that it is known by. To whom? To the author, to the publisher, to the reader, and yes, to the catalogers holding it in their hands. Most of these things usually only appear in one manifestation, so naturally the title that's there on the first printing is the one that it's known by. As soon as it rolls off the press... Kevin From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Casey A Mullin Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:45 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) Excellent point, Adolfo. I believe that particular LC-PCC PS was written before Selections was re-framed as a work attribute. At that time, Poems. Selections was an undifferentiated expression access point. And to Kevin's point, what gets me about this particular sentence is its use of plurals, which influences the cataloger's thinking more than it perhaps ought to? Perhaps if it read If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in one or more resources embodying that compilation or in one or more reference sources, I might read it very differently. Then there's still the known by bit. Known to whom? The cataloger holding it in hand? How long must an entity be around before it is known by ... a title??? I sense a revision proposal and/or LC-PCC PS is needed for this. Otherwise, the community could just go around and around on this issue ad infinitum. Casey On 3/21/2013 2:55 PM, Tarango, Adolfo wrote: Catalogers at UCSD are in full agreement with Kevin on this point and UCSD raised this issue on PCC-List with regards to LC’s decision that they will always be using a collective title for works like this. UCSD is concerned also with LC’s further policy decision that they will not differentiate such collective titles, e.g. a compilation of poems by author x issued in 2011 and one issued in 2012 would both get exactly the same AAP, “author x. Poems. Selections” We find this contrary to RDA since 6.27.1.9 (and its policy statement) tells us to differentiate all access points for works. It’s not very useful to catalogers or users (our public services staff has already noticed these and would like them removed) and we would like to see the policy reconsidered. Adolfo R. Tarango Head – UC Systemwide Collection Services atara...@ucsd.edumailto:atara...@ucsd.edu 858-822-3594 [cid:image001.png@01CD877F.99FB9310] From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:38 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) The way I read If a compilation of works is known by a title that is used in resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources that means that any brand-spanking-new publication which happens to be a compilation would meet that condition. Unless you're arguing that Stephen King's latest collection of short stories and Natasha Trethewey's latest collection of poems are not known by the titles appearing on the title pages and covers, and by which people look for them in bookstores and libraries. I don't see anything implying that a resource needs to sit around and age for any period of time before it is known by a title. I think the access points resulting from 6.2.2.10 are quite valuable to aid the FRBR user task of Find, but I think using them as the AAP makes things more difficult for the Identify and Select tasks. They really should be variant access points, IMO. Kevin From: Casey A Mullin [mailto:cmul...@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 2:24 PM To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access Cc: Kevin M Randall Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3) To me, it has to do with the phrases known by and resources embodying that compilation or in reference sources; these imply that the compilation as a work in its own right has been around for awhile, and with that particular title. YMMV, of course. Casey On 3/21/2013 10:08 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: Casey Mullin said, regarding 6.2.2.10: The best practice for when to apply this condition has not really been established. Certainly, Leaves of grass by Whitman would qualify for most catalogers, but new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. I don't understand why new collections published for the first time probably wouldn't. Could you elaborate? Kevin Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edumailto:k
Re: [RDA-L] Question about conventional collective titles (6.2.2.10.3)
Kevin's reading is a
perfectly reasonable one. What concerns me is that LC's practice
(which is to treat every compilation as NOT meeting this
criterion, by default) is in sharp conflict with what Kevin seems
to be advocating (which, to my reading, brings us back to AACR2
practice for non-musical compilations anyway; music's always been
a horse of a different color here!). What I would advocate for is
a principled compromise, one that allows the broad array of
community approaches that RDA is designed to support. I just don't
think the current wording is conducive to that. "Known by" is way
too slippery a concept, IMO.
Casey
On 3/21/2013 3:57 PM, Kevin M Randall wrote:
Re
"known by" and for how long. The point I was trying to make
in my last post was that for most modern publications, the
title appearing on the title page and cover is the one that
it is "known by". To whom? To the author, to the
publisher, to the reader, and yes, to the catalogers holding
it in their hands. Most of these things usually only appear
in one manifestation, so naturally the title that's there on
the first printing is the one that it's known by. As soon
as it rolls off the press...
Kevin
From:
Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On
Behalf Of Casey A Mullin
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:45 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about
"conventional collective titles" (6.2.2.10.3)
Excellent point, Adolfo. I believe that
particular LC-PCC PS was written before "Selections" was
re-framed as a work attribute. At that time, "Poems.
Selections" was an undifferentiated _expression_ access point.
And to Kevin's point, what gets me about this particular
sentence is its use of plurals, which influences the
cataloger's thinking more than it perhaps ought to? Perhaps
if it read "If a compilation of
works is known by a title that is used in one or more
resources embodying that compilation or in
one or more reference sources", I might
read it very differently. Then there's still the "known by"
bit. Known to whom? The cataloger holding it in hand? How
long must an entity be around before it is "known by ... a
title"???
I sense a revision proposal and/or LC-PCC PS is needed for
this. Otherwise, the community could just go around and
around on this issue ad infinitum.
Casey
On 3/21/2013 2:55 PM, Tarango, Adolfo wrote:
Catalogers
at UCSD are in full agreement with Kevin on this point and
UCSD raised this issue on PCC-List with regards to LC’s
decision that they will always be using a collective title
for works like this. UCSD is concerned also with LC’s
further policy decision that they will not differentiate
such collective titles, e.g. a compilation of poems by
author x issued in 2011 and one issued in 2012 would both
get exactly the same AAP, “author x. Poems. Selections” We
find this contrary to RDA since 6.27.1.9 (and its policy
statement) tells us to differentiate all access points for
works. It’s not very useful to catalogers or users (our
public services staff has already noticed these and would
like them removed) and we would like to see the policy
reconsidered.
Adolfo
R. Tarango
Head
– UC Systemwide Collection Services
atara...@ucsd.edu
858-822-3594
From:
Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]
On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 1:38 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Question about
"conventional collective titles" (6.2.2.10.3)
