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

Reply via email to