You are right the rules do not specifically say you can do it, but it is
definitely in the spirit of RDA and perhaps you'd like to work with Christine
Frodl to propose an adjustment to the way RDA states this? - Barbara
Barbara B. Tillett
On Feb 6, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller
<wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de> wrote:
> Barbara,
> I can??? Now this is a pleasant surprise.
> Only I'm not sure where it says so in the rules. The optional omission in
> 2.4.1.5 explicitly states "omit all but the first of each group."
> I've noted that the optional omission in 2.4.1.4 says "Always record
> the first name appearing in a statement". This sounds as if it were possible
> to leave out e.g. all names after the fifth. But on the other hand there is
> an explicit reference to 2.4.1.5: "When omitting names from a statement of
> responsibility naming more than three persons, etc., apply the instructions
> given under 2.4.1.5".
> Heidrun
>
>
> Am 06.02.2013 22:06, schrieb JSC Chair:
>> You can do exactly what you suggested with RDA. - Barbara Tillett
>>
>> On Wednesday, February 6, 2013, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
>>> After all this talk about German cataloging, I suppose it's time to get
>>> back to RDA ;-)
>>> The other day we discussed the optional omission for statements of
>>> responsibility naming more than three persons, etc. (RDA
>>> 2.4.1.5). The general feeling was that although everybody ought to try and
>>> follow the standard rule (i.e. transcribe all names), it should be possible
>>> to use the optional omission for very long lists, if transcribung all names
>>> simply cannot be accomplished. I assume that a very similar idea is
>>> expressed in the LC-PCC-PS for 2.4.1.5 in the word "generally" ("Generally
>>> do not omit names in a statement of responsibility").
>>> But I'm not happy that the only alternatives are either "all names"
>>> (standard rule) or "only the first name" (option). Why shouldn't it be
>>> equally possible to transcribe, say, the first three, five or ten names and
>>> then put "[and x others]"? This might be a more satisfactory way of dealing
>>> with longish lists than reducing them to only one name.
>>> Of course I'm aware of the fact that the "only first name" rule corresponds
>>> to AACR2. But still, I can see no reason why there shouldn't be more
>>> flexibility here.
>>> Am I the only one who feels like this?
>>> Heidrun
>>>
>>> --
>>> ---------------------
>>> Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
>>> Stuttgart Media University
>>> Faculty of Information and Communication
>>> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
>>> www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Barbara B. Tillett, Ph.D.
>> Chair, Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA
>>
>
>
> --
> ---------------------
> Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
> Stuttgart Media University
> Faculty of Information and Communication
> Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
> www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
