Wotta boon! (The fact of IMDb already existing notwithstanding). And let's extend this fantastic accomplishment to other areas of interest and inquiry, too. How long until I can consult my local OPAC to find out who won the batting title in the Pacific Coast League in 1932?
Mike Tribby Senior Cataloger Quality Books Inc. The Best of America's Independent Presses mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 10:35 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors As an option for navigating the relationships people have had to creative works, there is the possibility of very user-friendly approaches, as in this IMDB example for the many job types Clint Eastwood has had in relation to films: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000142/ Current library catalogs do not come close in helping users in ways that are now commonly found across the web. Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and > Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Laurence S. > Creider > Sent: November 26, 2012 11:27 AM > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors > > And all this helps the public how? > > -- > Laurence S. Creider > Interim Head > Archives and Special Collections Dept. > University Library > New Mexico State University > Las Cruces, NM 88003 > Work: 575-646-4756 > Fax: 575-646-7477 > lcrei...@lib.nmsu.edu > > On Mon, November 26, 2012 9:19 am, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote: > > The distinction between “artist†and “illustrator†currently > > exists in the choices for main entry heading. Catalogers have to > > know that an artist can be a main entry heading, and an illustrator > > can only be an added entry. The distinction comes down to knowing > > what is the work and what is the expression (that is, in knowing > > that an illustrator has only contributed to the realization of a > > work, but is not responsible for the primary intellectual or > > creative content of the > work). > > These categorizations may seem arbitrary, but they are still the > > basis for traditional cataloging, and reappear as > > entity-relationships in RDA. RDA does go a bit further in > > recognizing that there may be more types of relationships beyond the crude > > main/added entry distinction. > > For example, a Creator may also have a Contributor role (as in > > Composer > and Singer). > > This can be seen in the second RDA/MARC example in > > http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/6jsc_rda_complete_exam > > pl > > es_bibliographic_jul0312_rev.pdf > > Thomas Brenndorfer > > Guelph Public Library > > > > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and > > Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jack Wu > > Sent: November 26, 2012 11:08 AM > > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors > > > > And the searcher, in order to search successfully, would have to > > know this distinction in our use of a different qualifier for the > > same person under different circumstances, as well, I presume? > > > > Jack Wu > > Franciscan University of Steubenville > > j...@franciscan.edu<mailto:j...@franciscan.edu> > > > >>>> Jenny Wright > >>>> <jenny.wri...@bibdsl.co.uk<mailto:jenny.wri...@bibdsl.co.uk>> > >>>> 11/26/2012 9:38 AM >>> > > My understanding is that: > > If the illustrations are integral to the work, the person who > > drew/painted them is a creator, or co-creator, and so the > > relationship designator should be “artistâ€. > > If the illustrations are complementary to the work, and belong at > > expression level (they contribute to the realisation of the work), > > then the relationship designator should be “illustratorâ€. > > What is more debatable is how one decides whether the art is > > integral to the work. Could another artist could draw new comic > > strips for the same story, or new pictures for a juvenile picture > > book without changing it to a new work? > > Jenny Wright > > Development Manager > > Bibliographic Data Services Ltd. > > > > > > > > > > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and > > Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Jack Wu > > Sent: 26 November 2012 14:30 > > To: > > RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> > > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors > > > > Then, in MARC, it can sometimes be using $e illustrator, but at > > other times $e artist? Or would one be using both terms? It's > > somewhat confusing to me. > > > > Jack Wu > > Franciscan University of Steubenville > > j...@franciscan.edu<mailto:j...@franciscan.edu> > > > >>>> JSC Secretary > >>>> <jscsecret...@rdatoolkit.org<mailto:jscsecret...@rdatoolkit.org>> > >>>> 11/23/2012 8:14 AM >>> > > Jenny, > > > > The LC-PCC PS you cite is in chapter 20, the chapter for > > contributors, and states the policy requiring an authorized access > > point for the first illustrator (someone with responsibility for the > > expression, not the work). If the person involved in your resource > > has responsibility at the work level as a creator, you would not be > > consulting chapter 20. > > > > Yes, the only creator-level term in appenidx I is "artist" because > > "illustrator" there is the term for a relationship at the expression > > level. > > > > Judy Kuhagen > > JSC Secretary > > > > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Jenny Wright > > <jenny.wri...@bibdsl.co.uk<mailto:jenny.wri...@bibdsl.co.uk>> wrote: > > Hi All > > I am looking at how to deal with children's picture books using RDA > > rules, and would like to know what others think. > > > > I think of children's picture books as being co-created by the > > author and the illustrator, and I believe it would be a different > > work if there were different illustrations, rather than a different > > expression. > > > > My reading of RDA is that if I believe a person to be a co-creator > > of a work, rather than a contributor to an expression, then the only > > available relationship designator for the illustrator is "artist". > > > > However, there is an LC-PCC PS stating "Provide an authorized access > > point in the bibliographic record for an illustrator in all cases of > > resources intended for children. Give the RDA appendix I designator > > "illustrator" in MARC 700 subfield $e." > > > > Can anyone help explain this apparent anomaly? > > Thank you > > Jenny Wright > > Development manager > > Bibliographic Data Services Ltd. > > > > ________________________________ > > Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance > > > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > __ __ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The > > service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a > > proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the > > globe, visit: > > http://www.star.net.uk > > ____________________________________________________________________ > > __ > > __ > > ________________________________ > > Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance > >
