Application to current and future encoding aside, perhaps this is another 
opportunity for me to plug the spreadsheet of Appendix I terms that I put up on 
the Web:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ak9dJXdWVGHddGp6YjhqUFktZlZ3WDdkOEp3ZEZhWkE&usp=sharing

or:

bit.ly/Ymw4dt

It's an attempt to think about these relationships as more of a useful, 
controlled vocabulary a la LCSH, than as just a list in the back of the rule 
book.  Each relationship has several values:

TYPE=Whether it can be used in an access point (Type 1) or only as an added 
entry (Type 2)

RDA relationship=Term as it appears in RDA

Possible SoRs=How a cataloger (or for that matter a script) might  recognize a 
given relationship in a bibliographic record (primarily 245 $c).

X-Refs=Relationships to other terms in the vocabulary

P/F/C/W/E/M/I=Booelan values, whether a relationship term can be used to 
connect a person/family/CB to a Work/Expression/Manifestation/Item. The idea 
being, often we start from those points first and then figure out the 
relationship. (E.g. ok, I have a person and a work, what possible relationships 
are there?) Someone could filter this list by these values to see only the ones 
they can use.

Domain=What intellectual domain or community this relationships belongs to 
(e.g.: legal, performing arts, book collecting, etc. ... note I haven't added 
any actual values to this yet.) So that someone could, say, filter out "legal" 
terms (of which there are many, and they are quite specific).

I could probably add links to RDA toolkit but since that resource is not free 
to the Web there's no point, really.

This is just a work in progress, and I'm sure there are many improvements that 
could be made.  So far however I've found it easier to use than the appendix.

--Ben

Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Deborah Fritz
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:56 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Coding subsequent creators in MARC 21 Bibliographic

That, again, is why adding the relationship designators are so important; even 
if they have to be at the highest levels, e.g., Creator. But we definitely do 
need a better high level designator than "Other Persons, Families, or Corporate 
Bodies Associated with a Work"

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@marcofquality.com<mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com>
www.marcofquality.com<http://www.marcofquality.com>

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Ed Jones
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 2:35 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Coding subsequent creators in MARC 21 Bibliographic

Thanks, Kevin. You're right. I had naively assumed an equivalence between 1XX 
and principal creator, but the 1XX--like the 7XX--contains a mix of creators 
and other persons, etc., associated with the work. Blah! :)

Ed

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 10:58 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Coding subsequent creators in MARC 21 Bibliographic

I don't like the idea of mapping RDA creator element to MARC 100/110/111, 
saying that "If it's 1XX, that means it's a creator."  That is not the meaning 
of the 1XX field, any more than the presence of a name at the beginning of an 
RDA authorized access point for a work/expression means that the entity so 
named is a creator.  It is true that in the vast majority of cases they are 
"creators", even if it's because RDA maintained the AACR "choice of main entry" 
practice by declaring many entities to be "considered to be creators" in 
19.2.1.1.  But it is in correct to say that defendants, complainants, or 
indictees (6.29.1.24-6.29.1.26) are creators even though they might end up 
being tagged as 1XX; they are "Other Persons, Families, or Corporate Bodies 
Associated with a Work" (19.3 and I.2.2).

In RDA terminology, the meaning of MARC 100/110/111 in a bibliographic record 
or name/title authority record is essentially "name portion of the authorized 
access point for a work or expression".

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
k...@northwestern.edu<mailto:k...@northwestern.edu>
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Ed Jones
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 12:16 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA>
Subject: [RDA-L] Coding subsequent creators in MARC 21 Bibliographic

While the RDA "creator" element can be mapped to the MARC 1XX field, this 
mapping breaks down for works involving more than one creator, since the 1XX 
field is not repeatable. At present, subsequent creators are mapped to MARC 
7XX, which is also used for contributors, so they can only be identified by 
including a (more specific) relationship designator. Consequently, unless a 
relationship designator has been included in a given MARC 7XX, there is no way 
to accurately map the data to a record syntax such as Dublin Core or a 
FRBR-based syntax that routinely distinguishes creators from contributors.

One way around this conundrum would be to bring back a couple of second 
indicator values that were formerly valid in the 7XX fields. These values 
distinguished what were then called alternative entries (value=0, 
definition=added entry can be sub-filed by title [essentially a creator]) from 
secondary entries (value=1, definition=added entry can be sub-filed by main 
entry [essentially a contributor]).

Restoring these values in MARC 21 Bibliographic would enable us to distinguish 
creators from contributors without the need to supply a more specific 
relationship designator in each case. It would also give equivalent status to 
all creators, which is important if one is looking for all the works of a given 
creator (rather than those works on which he/she just happens to be named 
first).




Ed Jones
Associate Director, Assessment and Technical Services
National University Library
9393 Lightwave Avenue
San Diego, California  92123-1447

+1 858 541 7920 (voice)
+1 858 541 7997 (fax)

http://national.academia.edu/EdJones

Reply via email to