J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Adam L. Schiff said:
...and whether future revisions of RDA sanction the description
of multiple manifestations on one record.
The same electronic item from different providers are not different
manifestations, any more than different pritings of the same edition
are different manifestations. An electronic provider is not a
publisher.
I absolutely agree with Greta that the policy should be uniformly
applied, and that includes retrospective change.
Just what is the uniform title intended to do here? To serve as a
one-line identifier for what's being catalogued; to provide a linking
point for the work content; or to provide a linking point for the
expression embodied?
Until we have that clear (and RDA discussions have failed to make that
clear to me -- perhaps on account of my inattention, but I can usually
follow clear exposition) we'll go on making ad-hoc and conflicting
decisions.
FWIW I don't think the application of FRBR categories provides us with
the tools to make the distinctions people are talking about here --
they're not subtle enough, at least not within the framework of the
MARC21 bibliographic format. And the success will depend on the display
created, a matter which RDA chose not to address, but crucial to the
outcome.
Hal Cain
Dalton McCaughey Library
Parkville, Victoria, Australia
h...@dml.vic.edu.au
