Heidrun said:
>I don't see any problems here which couldn't be solved by sound
>underlying data structures on the one hand and a proper design of the=20
>display on the other.
How nice to have Heidrun join Bernhard as a voice of reason from
Europe. Germany may save more than the euro zone!
>Firstly, the system should be able to distinguish between an aggregate
>work and an "ordinary" work.
In MARC, adding a code for aggregate to LDR/06 should do it. Code
"c", I assume, means a collection of separate items, as opposed to
bound withs. We use it for, as an example, a collection of manuscript
letters or sermons.
>The whole/part relationship (from my approach) would not be enough as
>ordinary works can have parts as well.
YES. We do chapter level records, including records for prefaces and
bibliographies, for some electronic publishers. They offer parts of
their works in mix and match packages. It is so refreshing to read a
post from someone who seems to occupy the same bibliographic world as
SLC. In offlist correspondence with this brilliant woman, I've found
only one thing with which to disagree.
>"Nabokov, Vladimir, 1869-1922. Bend sinister (English. With
>additional materials)",
So nice to see the "preferred title" include main entry. I do think
"preferred title" is misleading as a term, when it includes more than
a title. "Preferred citation" would make more sense, as well as being
in accord with scholarly practice. On the other hand, series citation
should only include series title. We know who wrote the past issues
of a series, but not who will write the next one.
>There may be also a way to record the title of the introduction not
>simply as "Introduction", but perhaps in a more meaningful way as
>"Introduction [to Nabokov, Vladimir, 1869-1922. Bend sinister]"
When we prepare part records for electronic monographs, and the part
title is not distinctive, we use 245 10 $a<Title of work>.$p<Title of
part>, e.g., $pIntroduction, Preface, Bibliography. It seems better
to me to gather by title the nondistinctive parts of a monograph,
rather than to gather all the prefaces, introductions, and
bibliographies.
In this thread, the WEMI relationship has been spoken of as vertical,
and the whole part one as horizontal. It seems to me we need a third
term for the whole part relationship; the whole part relationship is
not horizontal; as Heidrun has pointed out in other posts, the part is
secondary to the whole. Translations and editions are horizontal, not
parts.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
