In their Framework for a Bibliographic Future, Karen Coyle, Diane Hillmann, Jonathan Rochkind and Paul Weiss say, under Guidance for Application in the Discussion section, 'As part of this development of extended guidance material along specialist lines, we need to recognize that different communities will apply FRBR Group I boundaries differently.'
The recently issued 2nd draft of Functional Requirements for Authority Data has, on page 9, under the definition of Work as an entity, a note which says in part 'The concept of what constitutes a work and where the line of demarcation lies between one work and another may differ from one culture to another, from one discipline to another or from one cataloguing agency to another.' At the end of the same paragraph, it says 'The specifics of cataloguing rules may also have a bearing on what is recognized as a work.' Martha Yee, in her comments on the March 2007 draft of RDA Chapter 3, which includes references to Chapter 4, says, under Elements that are Content (Chapter 4) not Carrier (Chapter 3), 'For motion picture and television works, colour is associated with the work, not the carrier.' Also, 'For motion pictures, sound is associated with either the expression or the work, not the carrier.' May it be necessary, since the materials catalogued by libraries are so diverse in their nature, to incorporate several slightly different notions of what constitutes a Work and what constitutes a Manifestation within the same set of rules, namely RDA? Philip Davis Philip Davis Redditch England [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------- Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Tryit now.
