In the light of ongoing discussions in Germany, this is a very
interesting question for me.
According to the German RAK rules, there is a clear solution for this
case (which I believe I have mentioned before on this list, but my
former example was perhaps a less obvious one):
First, here's the original text of the rules (from RAK § 128, 6), for
those on the list who read German (quite a lot of people, as I've found
to my amazement):
"Angaben, zwischen denen ein Doppelpunkt oder Gedankenstrich steht,
gelten im allgemeinen als Sachtitel und Zusatz zum Sachtitel. Solche
Angaben gelten jedoch als ein Sachtitel, wenn die erste Angabe allein
keine ausreichende sachliche Benennung ergibt. Im Zweifelsfall gelten
sie als ein Sachtitel."
And here's my translation:
"Statements which are separated by a colon or a dash are normally
treated as title proper and other title information. But if the first
statement on its own is insufficient for naming the resource, both
statements together are treated as title proper. In case of doubt, treat
the statements as one title proper."
I especially like the "in case of doubt" provision (there are a lot of
those in RAK, by the way, and they will be sadly missed...).
So, in our example, the RAK solution would not be "title proper : other
title information", but instead, the whole would be treated as title
proper. The colon would consequently be kept as an ordinary punctuation
mark, and not as punctuation prescribed by ISBD. In MARC it then looks
like this:
245 _0 $a Evaluation of pilot project: emergency traffic control for
responders
I can't help feeling that this would also be a good solution in RDA.
Personally, I wouldn't be happy with transposing the statements and
using "emergency traffic control for responders" as title proper and
"evaluation of pilot project" as other title information, as was
suggested by Jenny and others. Although I see the point about the RDA
definition for title proper, I still feel that this would mean taking
too much liberties with what we find on the resource. The producers of
the book *could* have presented the statements like this:
Emergency traffic control for responders
Evaluation of pilot project
But they didn't choose to do it. I think catalogers should respect this.
There is a strong convention that the title proper comes before other
title information on a title page - so I don't think we can simply
"pick" what we want to have as the title proper. Only in rare cases I
think a transposition can be justified, when the placement of the
statements on the t.p. is really rather a question of (perhaps
unconventional) design. But in a case like the one we're talking about,
I think the presentation of the statements is rather some sort of
stylistic device, which should be faithfully transcribed.
But maybe I'm just being traditionalist here.
Heidrun
On 19.03.2013 13:59, Jenny Wright wrote:
Hi Cathy
I don't believe there's any conflict here, between what you want to do
(use "Emergency traffic control for responders" as the title proper)
and what RDA is telling you to do in 2.3.2 Title proper and 2.3.4
Other title information.
The title proper is defined as "the chief name of a resource, i.e. the
title normally used when citing the resource"; and other title
information is defined as "the information which appears in
conjunction with, and is subordinate to, the title proper".
I do not believe that a phrase appearing above another phrase on a
title page necessarily makes it more important -- you can use your
judgement to determine which phrase is intended as the chief name, and
which phrase is subordinate.
Hope this helps
Regards
Jenny Wright
Development Manager
Bibliographic Data Services Ltd.
*From:*Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Crum,
Cathy (KDLA)
*Sent:* 19 March 2013 12:15
*To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
*Subject:* [RDA-L] RDA and the Title Proper
Hi all,
We are beginning to transition into original cataloging with RDA, but
we have encountered a situation concerning the title proper and other
title information.
The title as presented on the title page is:
Evaluation of pilot project:
Emergency traffic control for responders
In the light of RDA's "transcribe it as you see it" theme, how would
you transcribe this title? Would you transcribe all of the title as
the title proper or is there a title proper and other title
information? I feel that "Emergency traffic control for responders"
is the title proper, but its placement on the title page is
problematic. If the 2 title segments had been flipped in sequence, I
think there would not have been much question about it. If you were
to transcribe all of the title as the title proper, would you include
the colon as well?
Any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated!
Cathy Crum
//
/Cathy Crum///
/Cataloging Supervisor///
/State Library Services///
/Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives///
/cathy.c...@ky.gov <mailto:cathy.c...@ky.gov>///
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
--
---------------------
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
