________________________________________
>From: J. McRee Elrod [m...@slc.bc.ca]
>Sent: March-15-12 11:01 PM
>To: Brenndorfer, Thomas
>Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
>Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Card catalogue lessons
>>What's great about the lists of relationship designators in RDA is
>>that the cataloger can at a glance see the nature of the types of
>>relationships that have historically been made.
>The RDA relationship lists are not in one alphabetical order, but
>broken up among Appendices I, J, and K aren't they? I seem to
>remember we had to look several places to find the terms to give as
>one alphabetic list in the MRIs. I find RDA very fragmented.
The order is neat and tidy:
Appendix I is for Group 2 to Group 1 (relationships of persons, corporate
bodies, families to works, expressions, manifestations and items)
[in MARC covered by main and added entries]
Appendix J is for Group 1 to Group 1 (relationships of works, expressions,
manifestations, items to other works, expressions, manifestations, and items)
[in MARC covered by added entries, structured or unstructured descriptions
(notes, linking entry fields, etc.), or by See Also references in authority
records]
Appendix K is for Group 2 to Group 2 (relationships of persons, corporate
bodies, families to other persons, corporate bodies, and families)
[in MARC covered by See Also references in authority records]
>>The problem with those GMDs is that they are the same GMDs regardless
>>of the Content Type.
>A compound [carrier : content] GMD would have dealt with the problem
>more easily. I don't see that the media type term (337) adds much,
>particularly since one is so misleading ("computer" for "electronic"),
>and one patrons don't understand ("unmediated").
"Computer" is straight out of AACR2. AACR2 uses "computer" when describing
computer carriers (AACR2 9.5B1), as in:
computer chip cartridge
computer disk
computer optical disc
computer tape cartridge
computer tape cassettee
computer tape reel
These are _computer_ media types.
"When new physical carriers are developed for which none of these terms is
appropriate, give the specific name of the physical carrier as concisely as
possible, preferably qualified by _computer_." AACR2 9.5B1
>>The 336-337-338 divide enumerates all the historical choices into
>>clean, neat categories.
>Except for kits, equipment, and large print among others.
"Large print" is a characteristic of the manifestation, and is a value under
the Font Size element. It is not a Content Type. It is not an intermediation
device. It is not a general form factor for a carrier. The
square-peg-in-round-hole method of cataloging is the mess that RDA is trying to
dig us out of. One doesn't fill out a government form by arbitrarily filling in
boxes by disregarding the purpose of each element and using whatever data
subjectively looks better.
Kits and equipment don't fit the categories either. "Object" is a List 1 GMD
(AACR2 1.1C1) that is carried forward in RDA. It makes more sense than the
listing of a handful of 3D object types for a GMD value to the exclusion of
thousands of hypothetical objects.
>Quoting RDA Ch. 18:
>"Relationship Designator
> The term relationship designator refers to a designator that
> indicates the nature of the relationship between persons, families,
> or corporate bodies represented by preferred access points and/or
> identifiers"
The quotes and numbers are mixed up. The most recent version of this definition
belongs in Chapter 29, not Chapter 18.
Actual quote:
RDA 18.1.6 Relationship Designator
"The term relationship designator refers to a designator that indicates the
nature of the relationship between a resource and a person, family, or
corporate body associated with that resource represented by an authorized
access point and/or identifier."
These are the relationships between creators, contributors, and so on and the
resources they are responsible for or have some assocation with (not just
creating-- a person could be related to an item with a designator like
"curator", a corporate body could be related to a manifestation with a
designator like "film distributor", or a person could be related to an
expression with a designator like "writer of added text").
whereas...
RDA 29.5 Relationship Designator
"A relationship designator is a designator that indicates the nature of the
relationship between persons, families, or corporate bodies represented by
authorized access points and/or identifiers."
These are the relationships between persons, corporate bodies, and families.
These are coded in MARC as See Also references in authority records. There is
an established practice for comparable designators with $w, which produces
display constants like "Earlier heading" and "Narrower term". the new RDA
designators are coded in $i following $wr as in the following examples:
100 1# $a Pei, I. M., $d 1917-
510 2# $wr $i founder of $a I.M. Pei & Partners
The other category of designators, between works, expression, manifestations,
and items (RDA Chapters 24 to 28), cover a wider variety of conventions for
identifying entities (not just access points and identifiers), and in MARC
appear in a wider variety of situations, including See Also references between
works in authority records. Here is an ideal utilization of designators:
100 1# $a Stoppard, Tom. $t Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead
500 1# $wr $i based on (work) $a Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Hamlet.
>I seem to recall from my schooling decades ago, that a deffinition is
>not supposed to simply repeat the term being defined. How about:
>"'Relationship designator' refers to a term indicating the role of a
>person. family, or corporate body in creating the resource being
>described, attached to the name used as an access point."?
The conventions for showing the relationship vary, but follow this basic
pattern:
<entity> <relationship designator> <entity representedy by identifer or
authorized access point>
This is the underlying data logic. In the Linked Data discussions, each
component could be a registered value. In standard database design, each value
could be the target of a query, and utilized in displays in different ways--
from facets and limits, to a report or listing, to a formatted display that
organizes information starting with one or the other entity. It's not always
about the AACR2 flat-file structure of headings, with designators "attached" to
names. The data should be captured and recorded in anticipation of the modern
usages.
Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library
