Excellent! Good job, RDA. :) I think what Daniel describes makes sense.
Paradis Daniel wrote:
The “parts” making up a uniform title in AACR2 (e.g., basic title, additions, subdivisions) have been defined in RDA as separate elements (Preferred title for the work, Date of work, Other distinguishing characteristic of the work, Content type, Language of expression, etc.). In these conditions, I doubt that cataloguers could use the “Preferred title for the work” for other reasons than to name the work. Cataloguers will continue to be able to collocate and distinguish works and expressions, though, by combining these elements in authorized access points or as elements in work records. The other uses fulfilled by uniform titles in AACR2 will still be possible in RDA, without confusing the data model. Daniel Paradis Service de catalogage Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981 Universite de Montreal C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville Montreal QC H3C 3J7 Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019 Fax: 514 343-6402 Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca http://www.bib.umontreal.ca -----Message d'origine----- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Jonathan Rochkind Envoyé : 22 juillet 2009 11:45 À : RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Objet : Re: [RDA-L] (Online) qualifier for series But "uniform title" has been used for lots of things other than "title of the work", exactly. Especially by music catalogers. Either those uses are going to be left un-filled by RDA.... or these catalogers are going to continue using the "title of work" to do things that aren't about naming the title of the work at all. Probably the latter. Which will just confuse things even more in our data model, not less. Jonathan