Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-23 Thread Adger Williams
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 wrote:

> 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 
>>
>> Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
>> Access
>> 
>> 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 > >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

2013-12-20 Thread Adam L. Schiff
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 
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access

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 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


Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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

2013-12-20 Thread Tarango, Adolfo
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?ller
>> Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
>>  
>> 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-De

Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-20 Thread James Weinheimer

On 12/20/2013 5:13 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:



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.



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

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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:

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.



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

2013-12-20 Thread James Weinheimer

On 12/20/2013 4:15 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:

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.



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:

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.



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

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

James Weinheimer wrote:


On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:


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 :-)



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

2013-12-20 Thread James Weinheimer

On 12/20/2013 2:49 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:


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 :-)



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

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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 :-)

Heidrun



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 
mailto:e...@biblio.tu-bs.de>> 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




--
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 



--
-
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

2013-12-20 Thread Bernhard Eversberg

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

2013-12-20 Thread Adger Williams
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 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
>



-- 
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

2013-12-20 Thread 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.


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

2013-12-20 Thread Bernhard Eversberg

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

2013-12-20 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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?ller
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
 
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
~~

Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-19 Thread Adam L. Schiff

Adolfo,

I sent my reply before reading a number of additional posts, and more that 
have come in, so I agree with you!


Adam

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Tarango, Adolfo wrote:


Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:34:22 +
From: "Tarango, Adolfo" 
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access

To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: 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 
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access

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

Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-19 Thread Tarango, Adolfo
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 
> Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> 
> 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

2013-12-18 Thread Adam L. Schiff
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 
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access

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


Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

2013-12-18 Thread Bernhard Eversberg

Adam L. Schiff wrote:

... none of these collections was treated as being known under its own 
title.

...

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)



Looking at these examples, and looking at the 'A' in RDA, what are we
to think?
Clearly, all of these are structured the way they are to generate the
well-known card headings, for no other purpose. And these cards then
got sorted into the right sequence by human "filers" who knew that
"Works" had to go before titles beginning with A and so forth. But how
do or can these concoctions support online access?

In addition, "Works" and "Selections" seem to be semi-standardized
formal subheadings, but I couldn't succeed in finding a vocabulary.
Is there any? For if not, what are we to do to improve international
exchange and, more important, interoperability? We here are not inclined
to introduce English as the language of the catalog. The necessity
of vernacular terms in headings and descriptions should be restricted
to a bare minimum. Codes are better than a list of verbal terms
in this regard.

If nothing happens in these matters, we have to conclude that the title
proper of RDA, at least in its LC incarnation, would have to be AACR3.

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

2013-12-18 Thread Heidrun Wiesenmüller

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