Karen Coyle said:
> <rda:titleOfTheWork>
> Hamlet. French
> </rda:titleOfTheWork>
><AccessPoint>Hamlet. French</AccessPoint>
>
>or even
>
><AccessPoint>Shakespeare...etc. Hamlet. French</AccessPoint>
In MARC, the language would be subfield coded, so I suspect at least
as much granularity would be needed in an HTLM schema.
One difficulty with the term "access point" is that it includes main,
added, and perhaps subject entries.
A translation of Hamlet would have both the main entry "Shakespeare
..." and the added entry "Hamlet ...", but a criticism of Hamlet would
have the subject heading "Shakespeare ...", but not "Hamlet". A work
which contains portions of Hamlet, a movie of Hamlet, etc., would have
an added entry under "Shakespeare ..." but not one under "Hamlet ...",
unless that work's title begins "Hamlet ...".
I find RDA terminology far less precise that AACR2, which extends to
the HTML markup terms above. Basic distinctions are lacking. That's
not your fault Karen, considering the muddy text you had to work with.
Any word on who is given the task of rewriting in "simple" English?
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
