Perhaps, but one should always refer back to the RDA objectives and principles, 
and FRBR/FRAD user tasks.

At one point in RDA development, the statement of responsibility was not going 
to be considered a core element. It was added back in as a core element. The 
core element set’s primary concern is the Identify user task, where resources 
have to be sufficiently differentiated from each other. The statement of 
responsibility also has utility in confirming that the resource sought is the 
one that matches the search criteria.

RDA’s principle of representation (RDA 0.4.3.4) says that the data describing a 
resource should reflect the resource’s representation of itself.

I think a highly elliptical statement, with names selected here and there, 
might violate the principle of representation, as people also match that 
statement of responsibility as recorded with what is on the resource.

And if not all names are to be recorded even in a note, it seems best to 
accompany the recording of those select names with a brief explanation. It 
seems easier to just list names in a note, separated by commas, then to have an 
awkward-looking statement of responsibility filled with gaps and unexplained 
appearances of some names and not others.

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 Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: February-07-13 1:39 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Statement of responsibility naming more than three persons 
etc.

Thomas Brenndorfer wrote:
AACR2 also says “not named in a statement of responsibility” but its 
application extended to situations when all but the first named in a 
transcribed statement of responsibility were omitted.

Thanks for this information; I didn't know that.

Nonetheless, the idea doesn't really appeal to me. In the RAK rules, there is a 
very basic principle which says that notes are normally used only to give 
information which is not apparent from the rest of the bibliographic 
description. I think this is a sound idea.

True, if we choose not to transcribe a name in a s-o-r, then this information 
isn't apparent from the rest of the bibliographic description, so we could give 
it in a note. But I'd still say it would be better to amend the s-o-r instead 
of using a note as some sort of "workaround".

Heidrun





--

---------------------

Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.

Stuttgart Media University

Faculty of Information and Communication

Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany

www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi<http://www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi>

Reply via email to