Referring to the statement that "many libraries are planning to strip off $4 and/or $e ...", are you saying that the subfields would be entered in cataloging and then suppressed? Just wanted to understand.
Thanks, Rita Lifton Library of The Jewish Theological Seminary New York, NY -----Original Message----- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2013 2:30 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Statement of responsibility naming more than three persons etc. >However, you can choose which entities to include in 7XX authorized >access points in a MARC bibliographic record; those access points do >not need to be justified in a transcribed element or by a note. This is my major argument with RDA. If revising, please consider restoring correlation between transcription and access points. If not justified, one is dependent on $4code or $eterm to know the relationship of the traced person to the manifestation being described. Many libraries are planning to strip off $4 and/or $e to avoid split files. I would prefer that the option to omit persons has one transcribe at least three, not one, for each function. __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca) {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
