Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Adam, We're so old-fashioned we still have cataloguing staff looking at the LC records. We find adequate reasons to do so. Along with catching various infelicities, we add our local practice at this point. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Adam L. Schiff asch...@u.washington.eduwrote: Who does the removing? In our workflow, LC copy goes through a quick cataloging process in Acquisitions Rapic Cataloging Division, and never sees the eyes of complex copy or original cataloger. That is, most of these records are processed either by machine or by student workers. Do you go back and find them later and delete them? In any case, that would not work for us because our catalog records are based on the master record in OCLC and whatever is there is the data that comes into our shared consortial catalog. Any changes made by anyone in OCLC to a record we have holdings on will be propagated into our consortial catalog, so to get rid of CCTs we'd have to delete them in the OCLC master record, and should someone put them back in, we'd get them right back. Adam Schiff University of Washington Libraries On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Adger Williams wrote: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 08:37:18 -0500 From: Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections) Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them that way? FWIW, my institution has been removed CCTs from LC records ever since the abandonment of the AACR2 rule about distinctive titles. Very seldom does it require more than a moment's thought. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Bernhard Eversberg e...@biblio.tu-bs.de wrote: Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenm?ller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let's get serious about the A aspect in RDA and treat titles as such, as titles, always, because end-users will always search for those titles because they find them cited as such, and noch concocted and perturbed in ways they'd never imagine. Add conventional collected titles at leisure (if you find any), or rather use machine-actionable codes wherever possible, but leave the titles alone. If we can't get away from the old spirit of cataloging that was based on unit descriptions on 3x5 cards and on filing rules that were not even part of AACR, then RDA is really a waste of time and will create more nuisance than usefulness. 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 -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu 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 ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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 -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Adolfo, I've read up the comments in the PCC-list archive on this topic. I like the practice of UCSD (I quote from Ryan Finnerty's mail): UCSD does not use CCTs when the works in a compilation are issued for the first time in that compilation. Examples include an original book of poems by one author, or a new collection of short stories, essays, etc. In cases of doubt whether something has been previously separately published, do not add a CCT. I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of a new book of e.g. poems or short stories, the author will think of this as *one* individual creation, i.e. *one* work, even if the bits it contains themselves can also be thought of as works. Compilation seems to imply that the things which are put together had some sort of independent existence before (at least this is my impression as a non-native speaker). This is not true if they were created especially for the collection. So I would daringly argue that these cases do not fall under 6.2.2.10 at all. Therefore, we do not even have to *think* about whether these things are known bei their own title or not. They aren't compilations, so they cannot get a conventional collective title. Instead, they should be treated as ordinary works. The German RAK rules, by the way, have an explicit rule to treat a book of poetry as a single work (§ 5,2). Heidrun Hi Adam, I believe you have mischaracterized the opinions expressed on PCC list. I believe many have expressed a disagreement with LC practice and are not following it. For example, at UCSD not only are we not following LC practice for the master record, we are actively removing the CCTs for our local records. Adolfo -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 12:45 PM To:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles I've asked just this question on the PCC list, since the policy statement that covers this is labeled LC practice. So far I've only heard back from a few libraries, but they are following LC practice. Which makes sense when you consider that much of the copy for cataloging that we get comes from LC, and we don't have the staffing to redo what they do. Therefore we will be getting and accepting many records that have these conventional collective titles, and any original cataloging records that we might create according to a different local practice would be just a drop in the bucket of all the records in our catalog. Adam On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wrote: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:08:42 +0100 From: Heidrun Wiesenm?llerwiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Adam, These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none of these collections was treated as being known under its own title. So, is it correct to assume that LC's rather extreme interpretation (that a collection can only become known by its own title over the course of time) is at present widely followed, although Kevin Randall and others have raised objections? I've noticed that in the NACO training module 6 http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/Module%206-Describing% 20Works%20and%20Expressions.pptx there is no detailed explanation of how the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10 is to be understood (slide 38). So I'm not sure whether all PCC libraries follow LC's practice here. Heidrun Adam L. Schiff wrote: Nicephorus, $c Blemmydes, $d 1197-1272. $t Works. $k Selections (Oeuvres theologiques) Rupert, $c of Deutz, $d approximately 1075-1129. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera apologetica) Talmage, James E. $q (James Edward), $d 1862-1933. $t Works. $k Selections (Beginner's guide to Talmage) William, $c of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris, $d 1180-1249. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera homiletica) Council of Trent $d (1545-1563 : $c Trento, Italy). $t Works. $k Selections (Documentos ineditos tridentinos sobre la justificacion) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Personal writings of Joseph Smith) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Essential Joseph Smith) Adam ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ To unsubscribe from RDA-L send
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let's get serious about the A aspect in RDA and treat titles as such, as titles, always, because end-users will always search for those titles because they find them cited as such, and noch concocted and perturbed in ways they'd never imagine. Add conventional collected titles at leisure (if you find any), or rather use machine-actionable codes wherever possible, but leave the titles alone. If we can't get away from the old spirit of cataloging that was based on unit descriptions on 3x5 cards and on filing rules that were not even part of AACR, then RDA is really a waste of time and will create more nuisance than usefulness. 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
We are talking about the level of the work here. The title of the manifestation is, of course, always recorded in the respective manifestation element. Heidrun Bernhard Eversberg wrote: Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let's get serious about the A aspect in RDA and treat titles as such, as titles, always, because end-users will always search for those titles because they find them cited as such, and noch concocted and perturbed in ways they'd never imagine. Add conventional collected titles at leisure (if you find any), or rather use machine-actionable codes wherever possible, but leave the titles alone. If we can't get away from the old spirit of cataloging that was based on unit descriptions on 3x5 cards and on filing rules that were not even part of AACR, then RDA is really a waste of time and will create more nuisance than usefulness. 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 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections) Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them that way? FWIW, my institution has been removed CCTs from LC records ever since the abandonment of the AACR2 rule about distinctive titles. Very seldom does it require more than a moment's thought. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Bernhard Eversberg e...@biblio.tu-bs.dewrote: Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let's get serious about the A aspect in RDA and treat titles as such, as titles, always, because end-users will always search for those titles because they find them cited as such, and noch concocted and perturbed in ways they'd never imagine. Add conventional collected titles at leisure (if you find any), or rather use machine-actionable codes wherever possible, but leave the titles alone. If we can't get away from the old spirit of cataloging that was based on unit descriptions on 3x5 cards and on filing rules that were not even part of AACR, then RDA is really a waste of time and will create more nuisance than usefulness. 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 -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Am 20.12.2013 14:32, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: We are talking about the level of the work here. The title of the manifestation is, of course, always recorded in the respective manifestation element. But you know that we had non of that casuistry in our rules? And for reasons that had been discussed thoroughly for quite some time. Did we or our users suffer from that or were they pestering us for qualified contentional collective titles? Isn't it just the very prolific authors where those can sometimes be of some use for some people? Or perhaps it is just Shakespeare ... B.E. 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Bernhard Eversberg wrote: But you know that we had non of that casuistry in our rules? And for reasons that had been discussed thoroughly for quite some time. Did we or our users suffer from that or were they pestering us for qualified contentional collective titles? Isn't it just the very prolific authors where those can sometimes be of some use for some people? Or perhaps it is just Shakespeare ... I believe that it is a legitimate need of users to find all compilations/collections of a certain type by a certain author, and I truly don't see authors like Shakespeare as the only cases where this would be relevant. Indeed the German RAK rules didn't cater for this need very well (unlike the older Prussian instructions). And of course I'm aware that the little that was left about conventional collective titles in our rules (or, rather, about *the* collective title, as there only was Sammlung, i.e. collection) has long gone out of practice in Germany. But my feeling is that this was a mistake Having the possibility to collocate compilations/collections is something I'm looking forward to when RDA is implemented. BUT: Doing this with conventional collective titles is probably not the best way to reach the goal. It mixes up the title with other attributes of the work in an odd way and forces catalogers to decide whether they want A) make it possible to find all editions of a certain compilation/collection (by not applying 6.2.2.10) or B) make it possible to find all compilations/collections of a certain type (by applying the CCTs in 6.2.2.10) I want a solution where it's possible to have both. Transforming the conventionsl collective titles into attributes of the work might be a way of making this possible. Heidrun -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote: snip Adger Williams wrote: Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections) Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them that way? Quite. They could be seen as attributes of the work and recorded in RDA elements 7.2 and 7.3 - in addition to the ordinary title of the work for the compilation/collection (RDA element 6.2). If this was consistently applied, it would give us the possibility to find A) all editions of a certain compilation/collection (making use of the title of the work) B) all compilations/collections of a certain type (making use of the attributes of the work) And everybody would be happy :-) /snip But people can do this right now, and they have been to do so for over a hundred and fifty years! As I tried to show, the problem is elsewhere. Something that was designed for a print environment collapsed when transferred into a computer environment and was never fixed. Nobody can find these titles under any of the forms of titles I have seen (who would ever think to search for the words works or selections or even worse: works. selections). So, if any of it is going to be useful, that means these titles must become findable to the general public, otherwise the collective uniform titles just become complex and useless appendages to our records. This is a fundamental problem and to fix it, we must do more than just find other words to use (omnium gatherum?) because this goes beyond specific words, just as our 19th-century predecessors understood. They solved it an a unique and brilliant way for their times: by special filing of the cards and what would have been difficult was suddenly very simple. That is why I suggested something new: the word cloud where those titles become obvious. http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2013/12/re-rda-l-collective-cities-that-is.html So the titles that are pretty much useless now *could* turn out to be useful (at least I think so), but I very well could be shown to be wrong. If new attempts to make these titles findable by the public are not successful and/or it turns out that the collective uniform titles really are simply obsolete holdovers from the card catalog, as suggested by Mac, then let's get rid of them and good riddance! It would be great to get rid of some work (besides getting rid of the rule of three and similar savings). The worst thing to do would be to continue a practice that is seen to be definitely obsolete--since many people think that is what cataloging is today anyway. That is not what I think of course, but why give ammunition to the budget cutters? -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
James Weinheimer wrote: On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote: snip Adger Williams wrote: Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections) Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them that way? Quite. They could be seen as attributes of the work and recorded in RDA elements 7.2 and 7.3 - in addition to the ordinary title of the work for the compilation/collection (RDA element 6.2). If this was consistently applied, it would give us the possibility to find A) all editions of a certain compilation/collection (making use of the title of the work) B) all compilations/collections of a certain type (making use of the attributes of the work) And everybody would be happy :-) /snip But people can do this right now, and they have been to do so for over a hundred and fifty years! Are you really sure they can? My feeling is that up to now, both aims have been fulfilled only partly. Maybe this is what makes it so unsatisfactory. If we assume that somebody knows how to use the conventional collective title in the first place (I agree that this is difficult as they are presented now), then they will still not get a *complete* list of all the compilations/collections of a certain type, because there always have been and still are exceptions (and yes, I know that uniform titles used to be optional under AARC2, anyway). According to the former LCRI, all cases with distinct titles didn't get a CCT. Now, LC seems to have reduced the exceptions, but you're still left with the Leaves of grass type, which doesn't get a CCT. Also, you don't use a CCT if you apply the basic rule in 6.2.2.10.3 instead of the alternative. So you'll get some, but certainly not all of the things you want (provided somebody wants this; I think they would, but perhaps this is a minority view). The second aim is also difficult to reach, because a CCT is recorded not in addition to but *instead of* the real work title. Compare: If you have a monograph like The live and times of X and you have the English edition and a German translation, then you can collocate them using the title of the work (The live and times of X), formerly called the uniform title. But if you have a compilation like Best of X's short stories in an English and a German edition, you cannot collocate these two in the same way, as the work title hasn't been recorded as Best of X's short stories but instead as Short stories. Selections. The real work title (Best of X's short stories) is identical with the English manifestation title, but not with the German, so you'll get only half of what you're looking for. That's why I think that the two things - the title of the aggregate work on the one hand, and the information about its collective character on the other - should better be kept apart instead of mixed together. Then we also wouldn't need all the casuistry which Bernhard mentioned. You wouldn't have to try and work out in which case the CCT should be used. We would simply do two different things: 1. Record the title of the work - no special rule would be needed for compilations/collections 2. Check if the work in question is a compilation/collection. If so, give the information in the respective attribute(s). Heidrun -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
On 12/20/2013 4:15 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote: snip Are you really sure they can? My feeling is that up to now, both aims have been fulfilled only partly. Maybe this is what makes it so unsatisfactory. /snip I honestly don't think that is the real problem. For the public, the collective uniform titles *do not exist* because they are unfindable. Before making our records even more complicated (and committing more and more ever-disappearing resources) it would make sense to find out if collective uniform titles are/could be useful to the public and if not, why not, and then continue from there. Otherwise, we are all working on personal feelings or beliefs. That's what a lot of what RDA is, though On a concrete point: snip The second aim is also difficult to reach, because a CCT is recorded not in addition to but *instead of* the real work title. Compare: If you have a monograph like The live and times of X and you have the English edition and a German translation, then you can collocate them using the title of the work (The live and times of X), formerly called the uniform title. But if you have a compilation like Best of X's short stories in an English and a German edition, you cannot collocate these two in the same way, as the work title hasn't been recorded as Best of X's short stories but instead as Short stories. Selections. The real work title (Best of X's short stories) is identical with the English manifestation title, but not with the German, so you'll get only half of what you're looking for. /snip Not quite correct. According to LCRI 25.11 https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/25-11-translations-etc, there is the rule: For partial collections containing works in translation, attempt to distinguish between those cases in which the translation is of an existing collection in the original language and cases in which there is no such collection in the original language. 1) If the collection does exist in the original language, use the uniform title of the original or, if no uniform title is appropriate, its title proper, followed by the language of the translation. 2) If the collection does not exist in the original language, use a collective uniform title according to 25.9A or 25.10A regardless of the quality of the title of the translated collection. Follow the collective uniform title with the language of the translation. (By the way, the words quality of the title refers to the concept of adequate title which is both very important and extremely vague) Determining whether a translation of a collection actually exists in the original can be a *lot* of work and demands just too much time from the cataloger. If the information is readily available from the item, it is no problem of course, but otherwise, even if you have a huge collection at your disposal, it is very arguably not worth the effort. My rule was almost always Stay in your chair, try from a cursory glance at the catalog whether anything looks as if it may be suitable and hope you don't find anything(!). Otherwise just assign the collective uniform title and go on to the next item. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
James, Before making our records even more complicated (and committing more and more ever-disappearing resources) it would make sense to find out if collective uniform titles are/could be useful to the public and if not, why not, and then continue from there. Otherwise, we are all working on personal feelings or beliefs. I don't believe that my suggestion would make our records so very complicated, but I see your point about reliable data. It is indeed a problem that we often don't really know what our users want. I would love to have a demo which would show links like collected works of this author or selected novels of this author whenever a title of the author in question is displayed (as I suggested the other day) and then count how often people click on these links. Perhaps I can work something out and give it a try. On a concrete point: snip The second aim is also difficult to reach, because a CCT is recorded not in addition to but *instead of* the real work title. Compare: If you have a monograph like The live and times of X and you have the English edition and a German translation, then you can collocate them using the title of the work (The live and times of X), formerly called the uniform title. But if you have a compilation like Best of X's short stories in an English and a German edition, you cannot collocate these two in the same way, as the work title hasn't been recorded as Best of X's short stories but instead as Short stories. Selections. The real work title (Best of X's short stories) is identical with the English manifestation title, but not with the German, so you'll get only half of what you're looking for. /snip Not quite correct. According to LCRI 25.11 https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/25-11-translations-etc, there is the rule: For partial collections containing works in translation, attempt to distinguish between those cases in which the translation is of an existing collection in the original language and cases in which there is no such collection in the original language. 1) If the collection does exist in the original language, use the uniform title of the original or, if no uniform title is appropriate, its title proper, followed by the language of the translation. 2) If the collection does not exist in the original language, use a collective uniform title according to 25.9A or 25.10A regardless of the quality of the title of the translated collection. Follow the collective uniform title with the language of the translation. (By the way, the words quality of the title refers to the concept of adequate title which is both very important and extremely vague) Determining whether a translation of a collection actually exists in the original can be a *lot* of work and demands just too much time from the cataloger. If the information is readily available from the item, it is no problem of course, but otherwise, even if you have a huge collection at your disposal, it is very arguably not worth the effort. My rule was almost always Stay in your chair, try from a cursory glance at the catalog whether anything looks as if it may be suitable and hope you don't find anything(!). Otherwise just assign the collective uniform title and go on to the next item. Thanks, I wasn't aware of this LCRI (I'm afraid there's still a lot I don't know about Anglo-American cataloging). Indeed this sounds rather complicated and a lot of effort. Also, I'm not sure I've really understood its consequences: So, the original collection might have got Poems. Selections but the translation would have got X's best poetry. German in 240? If so, then that would still seem something of a muddle to me. And would that rule still be valid under RDA? I can't remember seeing something similar in the LC-PCC PS. Heidrun -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
On 12/20/2013 5:13 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote: snip Thanks, I wasn't aware of this LCRI (I'm afraid there's still a lot I don't know about Anglo-American cataloging). Indeed this sounds rather complicated and a lot of effort. Also, I'm not sure I've really understood its consequences: So, the original collection might have got Poems. Selections but the translation would have got X's best poetry. German in 240? If so, then that would still seem something of a muddle to me. And would that rule still be valid under RDA? I can't remember seeing something similar in the LC-PCC PS. /snip What this means is *if* a cataloger gets a book titled The Coffin of Count Thrümmel by Otto Bierbaum, finds that it is a translation and contains several other poems, he or she is supposed to look to see if it existed as a separate collection in German. The cataloger then may run across this Die Schatulle des Grafen Thrümmel und andere nachgelassene Gedichte, (http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/2640962) and then the cataloger is to try to determine if it is the same collection or not. If it is determined that it is a translation of this specific collection, the uniform title would be: 240 10 Schatulle des Grafen Thrümmel und andere nachgelassene Gedichte.$lEnglish otherwise, if it is not the same thing, you would do: 240 10 Poems.$kSelections.$lEnglish and you could throw on a date. The idea of adequate title may also apply here. LCRI 25.10 example 2. https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/25-10-works-in-a-single-form since this would mean that the original German title was adequate. This seemed to me to be what you were suggesting in your post. As I pointed out, it is really a lot of work for, as I see it, little gain. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Hello Heidrun, My understanding of FRBR is that regardless of independent existence prior to its appearance, each poem, short story, song, etc., is considered a work in and of itself regardless of whether their creator considered them such. Since a compilation is simply defined as a gathering of multiple works, every aggregation of such items is a compilation, again, regardless of whether the creator considered them collectively a single work. I would be happy to be corrected if this isn't an accurate understanding of FRBR. Adolfo -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: Friday, December 20, 2013 4:37 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Adolfo, I've read up the comments in the PCC-list archive on this topic. I like the practice of UCSD (I quote from Ryan Finnerty's mail): UCSD does not use CCTs when the works in a compilation are issued for the first time in that compilation. Examples include an original book of poems by one author, or a new collection of short stories, essays, etc. In cases of doubt whether something has been previously separately published, do not add a CCT. I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of a new book of e.g. poems or short stories, the author will think of this as *one* individual creation, i.e. *one* work, even if the bits it contains themselves can also be thought of as works. Compilation seems to imply that the things which are put together had some sort of independent existence before (at least this is my impression as a non-native speaker). This is not true if they were created especially for the collection. So I would daringly argue that these cases do not fall under 6.2.2.10 at all. Therefore, we do not even have to *think* about whether these things are known bei their own title or not. They aren't compilations, so they cannot get a conventional collective title. Instead, they should be treated as ordinary works. The German RAK rules, by the way, have an explicit rule to treat a book of poetry as a single work (§ 5,2). Heidrun Hi Adam, I believe you have mischaracterized the opinions expressed on PCC list. I believe many have expressed a disagreement with LC practice and are not following it. For example, at UCSD not only are we not following LC practice for the master record, we are actively removing the CCTs for our local records. Adolfo -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 12:45 PM To:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles I've asked just this question on the PCC list, since the policy statement that covers this is labeled LC practice. So far I've only heard back from a few libraries, but they are following LC practice. Which makes sense when you consider that much of the copy for cataloging that we get comes from LC, and we don't have the staffing to redo what they do. Therefore we will be getting and accepting many records that have these conventional collective titles, and any original cataloging records that we might create according to a different local practice would be just a drop in the bucket of all the records in our catalog. Adam On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wrote: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:08:42 +0100 From: Heidrun Wiesenm?llerwiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Adam, These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none of these collections was treated as being known under its own title. So, is it correct to assume that LC's rather extreme interpretation (that a collection can only become known by its own title over the course of time) is at present widely followed, although Kevin Randall and others have raised objections? I've noticed that in the NACO training module 6 http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/Module%206-Describing % 20Works%20and%20Expressions.pptx there is no detailed explanation of how the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10 is to be understood (slide 38). So I'm not sure whether all PCC libraries follow LC's practice here. Heidrun Adam L. Schiff wrote: Nicephorus, $c Blemmydes, $d 1197-1272. $t Works. $k Selections (Oeuvres theologiques
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Adolfo, My understanding of FRBR is that regardless of independent existence prior to its appearance, each poem, short story, song, etc., is considered a work in and of itself regardless of whether their creator considered them such. Since a compilation is simply defined as a gathering of multiple works, every aggregation of such items is a compilation, again, regardless of whether the creator considered them collectively a single work. I would be happy to be corrected if this isn't an accurate understanding of FRBR. FRBR says amazingly little about aggregates. There is no real definition of a compilation either (by the way: there is also no definition of this term in RDA). Here's a quote from FRBR chapter 3.3, where we can find the basic statement on aggregates: The structure of the model, however, permits us to represent aggregate and component entities in the same way as we would represent entities that are viewed as integral units. That is to say that from a logical perspective the entity work, for example, may represent an aggregate of individual works brought together by an editor or compiler in the form of an anthology, a set of individual monographs brought together by a publisher to form a series, or a collection of private papers organized by an archive as a single fond. By the same token, the entity work may represent an intellectually or artistically discrete component of a larger work, such as a chapter of a report, a segment of a map, an article in a journal, etc. For the purposes of the model, entities at the aggregate or component level operate in the same way as entities at the integral unit level; they are defined in the same terms, they share the same characteristics, and they are related to one another in the same way as entities at the integral unit level. The basic message here is that works can be seen on different levels, and we find the same idea in RDA. True, there is no distinction between different kinds of aggregate works in FRBR, but I don't think this means that we're forced to treat all kinds of aggregate works in an identical way in cataloging. Note that collective titles aren't mentioned anywhere in FRBR. There is title of the work as an attribute of the work, and therefore, there is a corresponding element in RDA. But FRBR doesn't prescribe how this element should be filled. It's up to the cataloging code to set up the relevant instructions. So I can't see why it shouldn't be possible to have one rule for something which was meant to be published as a unit by the creator and a compilation which was only assembled only at a later stage. By the way: The FRBR Working Group on Aggregates doesn't accept the notion of an *aggregate* work at all, see the final report: http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbrrg/AggregatesFinalReport.pdf Instead, they talk about an *aggregating* work which stands for the creative effort of having put the things together. So, a book containing three novels is not a manifestation of an aggregate work which in itself is made up of three individual works. Instead what we have here (in the view of the Working Group) is an aggregate manifestation, in which *four* works are manifested: the three novels and the aggregating work (i.e. the effort of the compiler). They still haven't managed to convince me of that. Heidrun -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Who does the removing? In our workflow, LC copy goes through a quick cataloging process in Acquisitions Rapic Cataloging Division, and never sees the eyes of complex copy or original cataloger. That is, most of these records are processed either by machine or by student workers. Do you go back and find them later and delete them? In any case, that would not work for us because our catalog records are based on the master record in OCLC and whatever is there is the data that comes into our shared consortial catalog. Any changes made by anyone in OCLC to a record we have holdings on will be propagated into our consortial catalog, so to get rid of CCTs we'd have to delete them in the OCLC master record, and should someone put them back in, we'd get them right back. Adam Schiff University of Washington Libraries On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Adger Williams wrote: Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 08:37:18 -0500 From: Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Aren't conventional collective titles really Form/Genre headings? (Poems. Selections, vs. Essays Selections, vs. Works Selections) Would they not serve their function less confusingly if we treated them that way? FWIW, my institution has been removed CCTs from LC records ever since the abandonment of the AACR2 rule about distinctive titles. Very seldom does it require more than a moment's thought. On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Bernhard Eversberg e...@biblio.tu-bs.dewrote: Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenm?ller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a compilation of works. Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let's get serious about the A aspect in RDA and treat titles as such, as titles, always, because end-users will always search for those titles because they find them cited as such, and noch concocted and perturbed in ways they'd never imagine. Add conventional collected titles at leisure (if you find any), or rather use machine-actionable codes wherever possible, but leave the titles alone. If we can't get away from the old spirit of cataloging that was based on unit descriptions on 3x5 cards and on filing rules that were not even part of AACR, then RDA is really a waste of time and will create more nuisance than usefulness. 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 -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu 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 ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
Hi Adam, I believe you have mischaracterized the opinions expressed on PCC list. I believe many have expressed a disagreement with LC practice and are not following it. For example, at UCSD not only are we not following LC practice for the master record, we are actively removing the CCTs for our local records. Adolfo -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 12:45 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles I've asked just this question on the PCC list, since the policy statement that covers this is labeled LC practice. So far I've only heard back from a few libraries, but they are following LC practice. Which makes sense when you consider that much of the copy for cataloging that we get comes from LC, and we don't have the staffing to redo what they do. Therefore we will be getting and accepting many records that have these conventional collective titles, and any original cataloging records that we might create according to a different local practice would be just a drop in the bucket of all the records in our catalog. Adam On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wrote: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:08:42 +0100 From: Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Adam, These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none of these collections was treated as being known under its own title. So, is it correct to assume that LC's rather extreme interpretation (that a collection can only become known by its own title over the course of time) is at present widely followed, although Kevin Randall and others have raised objections? I've noticed that in the NACO training module 6 http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/Module%206-Describing% 20Works%20and%20Expressions.pptx there is no detailed explanation of how the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10 is to be understood (slide 38). So I'm not sure whether all PCC libraries follow LC's practice here. Heidrun Adam L. Schiff wrote: Nicephorus, $c Blemmydes, $d 1197-1272. $t Works. $k Selections (Oeuvres theologiques) Rupert, $c of Deutz, $d approximately 1075-1129. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera apologetica) Talmage, James E. $q (James Edward), $d 1862-1933. $t Works. $k Selections (Beginner's guide to Talmage) William, $c of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris, $d 1180-1249. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera homiletica) Council of Trent $d (1545-1563 : $c Trento, Italy). $t Works. $k Selections (Documentos ineditos tridentinos sobre la justificacion) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Personal writings of Joseph Smith) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Essential Joseph Smith) Adam ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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 ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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 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
Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles
I've asked just this question on the PCC list, since the policy statement that covers this is labeled LC practice. So far I've only heard back from a few libraries, but they are following LC practice. Which makes sense when you consider that much of the copy for cataloging that we get comes from LC, and we don't have the staffing to redo what they do. Therefore we will be getting and accepting many records that have these conventional collective titles, and any original cataloging records that we might create according to a different local practice would be just a drop in the bucket of all the records in our catalog. Adam On Wed, 18 Dec 2013, Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wrote: Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 10:08:42 +0100 From: Heidrun Wiesenm?ller wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles Adam, These examples all seem to follow LC's interpretation of the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10, i.e. none of these collections was treated as being known under its own title. So, is it correct to assume that LC's rather extreme interpretation (that a collection can only become known by its own title over the course of time) is at present widely followed, although Kevin Randall and others have raised objections? I've noticed that in the NACO training module 6 http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/Module%206-Describing%20Works%20and%20Expressions.pptx there is no detailed explanation of how the first sentence of RDA 6.2.2.10 is to be understood (slide 38). So I'm not sure whether all PCC libraries follow LC's practice here. Heidrun Adam L. Schiff wrote: Nicephorus, $c Blemmydes, $d 1197-1272. $t Works. $k Selections (Oeuvres theologiques) Rupert, $c of Deutz, $d approximately 1075-1129. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera apologetica) Talmage, James E. $q (James Edward), $d 1862-1933. $t Works. $k Selections (Beginner's guide to Talmage) William, $c of Auvergne, Bishop of Paris, $d 1180-1249. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera homiletica) Council of Trent $d (1545-1563 : $c Trento, Italy). $t Works. $k Selections (Documentos ineditos tridentinos sobre la justificacion) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Personal writings of Joseph Smith) Smith, Joseph, $c Jr., $d 1805-1844. $t Works. $k Selections (Essential Joseph Smith) Adam ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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 -- - Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi 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 ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ 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
