Bernadette, My understanding is that the relator term "author" is meant to be related to a creator of a work. In the model you are describing the contributing authors aren't the creator of the described work which is the "dictionary of biography".
I think general practice is not to delve into the analytic works that are contained within the described work. This sort of practice if was drilled into would provide an Authorized Access Point for each of the contributed works (entries in this case) and their associated creators. At the least LC-PCC policy would instead include a contents note as an unstructured description in place of these individual access points for the works contained within the described work. So, I think the bigger issue is: do the 15 contributing authors (of individual entries) need individual access to the their contributions.... Or another way to frame it is: do the individual works within a compilation need controlled access points for each of them within your catalog. If not then you can stop there, but if you think yes, then the "correct" way (as I understand it) is to provide an authorized access point for each of the created works by the contributing authors. However, I think the decision for most, is a negative, but with the increasingly networked environment the scope of what is necessary is expanding, that not could become yes. -- Sean Chen <slc.c...@gmail.com> On Feb 24, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Bernadette Mary O'Reilly <bernadette.orei...@bodleian.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > Hello, > > I want to provide a ‘model’ record for training purposes for a resource which > is a dictionary of biography. It has a consultant editor, 3 editors and 15 > contributors. The latter presumably did most of the writing and are between > them responsible for most of the intellectual/artistic content of the > resource, but because they are responsible for different bits the work is a > compilation, entered under title. > > ‘editor of compilation’ seems right for the 3 editors. I suppose that the > consultant editor will have to be just ‘editor’, but that doesn’t seem good > for someone who presumably is offering guidance before and during the writing > rather than tidying it afterwards. And what about the contributors? Is it > legitimate to use ‘author’ for contributors to a work entered under a title? > They are authors of their own bits, but not creators with respect to the work > as a whole, and ‘author’ is in the creator list. (I only plan to name one > contributor – the rest will be ‘[and fourteen others].’) > > A similar case: a compilation of photographs by many different people, each, > naturally, responsible for separate photos. Could they be ‘photographer’? > ‘illustrator’ is not good, since the text is slight and subordinate to the > photos. > > And if a composer sets a pre-existing poem to music, what relator term should > the poet get? None of the creator list terms are available, and ‘writer of > added lyrics’ presumes that the music predates the text. > > Suggestions or clarifications would be very welcome. > > Thanks, > Bernadette > > ******************* > Bernadette O'Reilly > Catalogue Support Librarian > 01865 2-77134 > Bodleian Libraries, > Osney One Building > Osney Mead > Oxford OX2 0EW. > *******************
