Hi! Perhaps the solution is to give rare/older materials cataloguers the possibility to record phrases such as « published by » as an optional addition ... Otherwise, the general instruction could simply ask cataloguers to record the name of the publisher, distributer, etc. ...
Marie-Chantal L'Ecuyer-Coelho Bibliothécaire Direction du traitement documentaire des collections patrimoniales Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec 2275, rue Holt Montréal (Québec) H2G 3H1 Téléphone : 514-873-1101 poste 3730 mc.coe...@banq.qc.ca www.banq.qc.ca Avis de confidentialité Ce courriel est une communication confidentielle et l'information qu'il contient est réservée à l'usage exclusif du destinataire. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé, vous n'avez aucun droit d'utiliser cette information, de la copier, de la distribuer ou de la diffuser. Si cette communication vous a été transmise par erreur, veuillez la détruire et nous en aviser immédiatement par courriel. -----Message d'origine----- De : Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] De la part de Heidrun Wiesenmüller Envoyé : 8 août 2013 17:10 À : RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca Objet : Re: [RDA-L] Capitalization in 2.9.4.4 Mac said: > > My reaction is, why is this phrase included, when function is covered > by 264 2nd indicators? My understanding is that transcribing things like "Distributed by ..." is all about the so-called principle of representation: "The data describing a resource should reflect the resource's representation of itself." (0.4.3.4). If you think about it, it's not really that much different from giving a statement of responsibility like "by XY" in addition to recording a creator relationship to XY and adding an appropriate relationship designator. You could argue that if the name of the element and the relationship designator are displayed, then all the necessary information is already there. Giving the statement of responsibility as well might be considered redundant information. But we still give it, because it is valuable in itself to show exactly *how* the information about the author is presented on the resource. I think this also applies to these statements of function, although this information is probably of less importance to our users. On the other hand, the proposal mentioned by Francis http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-LC-24.pdf even proposes transcribing things like "published by", arguing: "Differences between publication statements help users identify different manifestations of a work. This is especially important for manifestations without ISBNs, which did not appear on manifestations until the later part of the 20th century. One manifestation of a work might say "Published by Isaac Riley" and another might say "Isaac Riley, Publisher."" (I'm not sure how often this case occurs, though). Admittedly, I sometimes wonder whether RDA doesn't take the principle of representation a bit too far. For example, in shortening names of publishers, the older codes of rules like AACR2 and RAK definitely violated the principle of representation. But I can also see an advantage in this and similar practices: You could say that catalogers did some "preprocessing" with the raw data found on the source by clearly bringing out the things which are really important for the users, separating them from the "noise" around them. Now, in times of RDA, our users have to find their way for themselves - through things like legal information about publishers ("Ltd.") or their advertising slogans ("Peter Lang, Internationaler Verlag der Wissenschaften", i.e. "international publisher of sciences"). If one of the main aims of description is to represent the resource as it represents itself, then perhaps a scan of the title pages would work just as well. (Sorry for being a bit provocative here). Heidrun -- --------------------- Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A. Stuttgart Media University Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi
