Yeah.... There's no "I" in RDA, guys.... !! Unhelpfully (but hoping to be excused because it's Friday),
John John Wagstaff Head, Music & Performing Arts Library Interim Head, Literatures and Languages Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070 e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Cindy Wolff Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 3:23 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR "If I want an English translation of a work, why would I want to know about the original and other translations?" I think the operative word here is "I". What if someone else wants to know, either a researcher or a library staff member doing collection development? The catalog serves many purposes for many types of users on many levels, which makes it hard to fit into a retail model of "I want it, here it is." The catalog is part of the research process in addition to being a delivery mechanism. Cindy Wolff > James said: > >>The structure of the card catalog allowed people to do the FRBR user >>tasks (where--for those who understood--people really and truly could >>find/identify/select/obtain works/expressions/manifestation/items by >>their authors/titles/subjects (or at least they could if the catalogers >>had done their jobs correctly). > > I am second to none in deploring the loss of some features of the card > catalogue. But in addition to cataloguers doing their job, those > cards had to be filed. At the end of the card catalogue era, this was > becoming increasingly difficult in larger academic institutions. Some > student filers were dumping cards rather that filing them. Escaping > card filing was a major improvement provided by OPACs, right up there > with keyword searching. In Canada, micro or print catalgues produced > by Utlas ending filing for many libraries prior to OPACs. > > I agree with your basic position on FRBR. If I want an English > translation of a work, why would I want to know about the original and > other translations? Certainly I am not interested in knowing about > resources not in the collection, when looking for immediate access. > Few libraries for which we catalogue would have the array of related > expressions and manifestations to display. > > Since in Bibframe translations are different works rather than > different expressions of one work, FRBR does not seem to be central to > Bibframe's structure, although there will be links relating these > works. Unfortunately, FRBR and WEMI organization of RDA do make RDA > difficult to comprehend. Theory trumped pragmatism. > > > __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca<mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca>) > {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/ > ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________ > > > > >
