I decided that I wanted to play with creating RDA data in XML (not
RDF-XML), so I did a very short experiment, which is located here:
http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML.html
This is NOT a test or any kind of proof because it's just one short
cataloging record that I copied into RDA fields. In
Hi Karen,
Thanks for posting this to the list. As I understand it, there are two
discrete RDA elements at play here: Language of the Expression (6.11),
and Authorized Access Point Representing an Expression (6.27.3). As you
point out, only the former is registered in the RDvocab.info
Karen Coyle said:
rda:titleOfTheWork
Hamlet. French
/rda:titleOfTheWork
AccessPointHamlet. French/AccessPoint
or even
AccessPointShakespeare...etc. Hamlet. French/AccessPoint
In MARC, the language would be subfield coded, so I suspect at least
as much granularity
Mac,
I think the the lack of added entries you are citing is only relevant
in a left-anchored browsing environment. Moving forward, such
left-anchored entries are not required for access. If a work is about
Hamlet, contains Hamlet, derives from Hamlet, etc., then the term
Hamlet will be
I want to be sure I understand this. If the work is a criticism of Hamlet,
under current subject heading rules, there would be a 600 10 Shakespeare,
William. |t Hamlet, right?
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 9:50 AM, J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Karen Coyle said:
rda:titleOfTheWork
On 28/07/2011 17:42, Karen Coyle wrote:
snip
Each of these parts of the access point could (and probably should)
be coded separately in the record. The question is whether they should
*also* be included as an access point. There are, however, no RDA or
FRBR elements listed for access points.
From Karen Coyle's http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML.html
LC control no.: 87211501
Type of material: Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
In RDA, this would be: text, unmediated, volume
Personal name: Omescu, Ion.
Uniform title: Hamlet. French
This would be the uniform title
So that we don't get side-tracked into discussion of improper
cataloging, I think I should quickly find an example that is better.
I'll do that and post it.
kc
Quoting J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca:
From Karen Coyle's http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML.html
LC control no.: 87211501
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
ISBN: 2130401309
Notes: Includes index.
Bibliography: p. [269]-270.
It is not clear to me whether LCPS will opt for Includes bibliographic
references (pages [269[-279) and index, as is now the case.
Mac Elrod wrote:
RDA says nothing about display, but display (perhaps mistakenly)
affects punctuation. It would be far simpler to have standardized
punctuation for each element.
The supplying of ISBD punctuation would be much better left to applications
outputting ISBD displays. ISBD
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
Sent: July 28, 2011 1:40 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] XML RDA record
...
Authorized
http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML2.html
I didn't do anything this time with the uniform title, although I did
use the title portion for the Work title and the language portion for
the language of expression.
I haven't figured out what to do with the LCCN -- it's a related
metadata record,
LC control no.: 87211501
[snip]
ISBN: 2130401309
Sorry, I should have remaked that in an international environment,
if both LCCN and ISBN can not be displayed at the top, ISSN is more
important.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | /
James said:
In the best scenario, it seems this should be something like:
AccessPoint
work
author
personalNameShakespeare/personalName
Shakespeare did not write the critique. His play is the subject.
originalTitleHamlet/originalTitle
this is not the original title of the critique, unless you
Karen Coyle li...@kcoyle.net wrote:
http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML2.html
I disagree with the term you select for Form of Work. It looks like
you pulled it from the Content Type list, which under RDA is
expression-level material. I'd probably use Play or something
similar, preferably from a
Quoting Mark Ehlert ehler...@umn.edu:
Karen Coyle li...@kcoyle.net wrote:
http://kcoyle.net/rda/RDAinXML2.html
I disagree with the term you select for Form of Work. It looks like
you pulled it from the Content Type list, which under RDA is
expression-level material. I'd probably use Play
16 matches
Mail list logo