Heidrun said:
>Actually, our German cataloguing rules differ from AACR2/RDA in exactly
>this respect. RDA 2.2.2.3 says: "If the resource consists of moving
>images (e.g., a film reel, a videodisc, a video game, an MPEG video
>file), use the title frame or frames, or title screen or screens, as the
>preferred source of information." According to our German rules, we
>prefer the information given on the container (if there is one). So for
>e.g. a DVD, the container would be our chief source of information.
>This, by the way, is another example of the many things we'll have to
>change when making the move to RDA (sigh...).
Since the container title represents the whole resource, while the
title frame represents only one item among several on most modern
DVDs, I think you have it right. The time saving factor is just as
added bonus.
I propose a EURIGPS or RI for RDA, with this as one of the provisions.
Another I would suggest is ISBD inclusions rather than "language of
the catalogue" ones, to avoid a variety of languages across Europe. and
to facilitate record exchange. Be assured that SLC as a EURIG member
(having European clients) would follow those guidelines.
This would not do the violence to RDA which the LCRI on reproductions
did to AACR2.
RDA takes a massive step back from the goal of IFLA's Universal
Bibliographic Control (UBC), in which the descriptive portion of the
record created in the country of publication was to be used
internationally.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
