I find some of the material nice and simple, with short summaries and
descriptions, accompanied by lists.
Other parts appear muddled and confused.
Many attributes for a manifestation are shoved up to the expression level, such
as title and extent. That leaves the bizarre 2.2.12 Extent of expres
http://myee.bol.ucla.edu/catrul&rdfIntro.htm
At the suggestion of an SLC cataloguer, I've just revisited Martha
Yee's Cataloguing rules. I've long admired Ms Yee's position paper on
OPAC display (available on the SLC website). That admiration now
extends to her rules.
These rules achieve the ob
Well for 111 and 711 you would encode the relater term in $j. But the
relator term/relationship designator certainly can be used with conference
access points.
Adam
^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle,
I rather agree with Adam. In my earlier years as a cataloger, we
catalogued a lot of missionary materials. While the publisher was not
due an 1XX, it certainly, in some cases was due a 7XX; it is was the
issuing body and in some way "caused it to be emanated" for its own
interests. We did not do
$j is used in 111 and 711 for the relator code ($e is used for "subordinate
unit").
Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Christopher D. Cook
Sent: November 10, 2011 1
-Original Message-
>>
>> What $e term would be used after a 111? We do many law symposia.
>author
>It is considered the creator of the work, just like a person may be. So
>the correct relator term is author.
Forgive me if I am mistaken, but $e is not used for relators in 111 or 711.
-Original Message-
>
> What $e term would be used after a 111? We do many law symposia.
author
It is considered the creator of the work, just like a person may be. So
the correct relator term is author.
---
There is also this from RDA I.1: "If the element used to
> -Original Message-
> From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca]
> Sent: November 9, 2011 11:42 AM
> To: Brenndorfer, Thomas
> Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework
> statement
>
>
> Thomas said:
>
> >An artist respons
The work "Genesis" is the work "genesis". I see no need for any
qualifier at all.
(AACR cataloguers use to qualify everything. German cataloging tradition
shows, that it is possible to use less qualifiers.)
Am 10.05.2011 21:01, schrieb Adam L. Schiff:
Mac wrote:
Just "Genesis" is a faith
9 matches
Mail list logo