On Sat, 3 Nov 2012, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
100/700/110/710 relators
One problem we have with both terms and codes is that needed ones are
lacking. For example, what code would you use for the agency for
which a report was prepared? That agency is certainly NOT an author,
although recipient agency was given $eauthor at a recent RDA workshop.
I would be tempted to use $4rcp, but I suspect that was intended for
the recipient of correspondence; $4oth $eother would help no one. We
have many such agencies in the electronic resources we catalogue.
We are regularly suggesting new needed designators, and these are
generally fasttracked by the JSC. You should submit suggestions/proposals
(with definitions) to your JSC rep (CCC/LAC). MARC relator/terms codes
can be suggested to LC at nd...@loc.gov. I would like to see the JSC
align their terms with MARC codes so that there's a one-to-one
correspondence if possible. For now, we've started using the RDA
designators even in our AACR2 cataloging instead of the codes, but I think
codes are a better way to go in the long run since they are language
independent.
Adam Schiff
