A] On Behalf Of Cheryl Tarsala
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 4:15 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Editor as main entry
Actually, don't the definitions of Editor and Editor of an Compilation in RDA
I.3.1 allow a cataloger the option to decide that editing or compilat
Cheryl Tarsala wrote:
> Actually, don't the definitions of Editor and Editor of an Compilation in
> RDA I.3.1 allow a cataloger the option to decide that editing or
> compilation rises to the level of authorship of a new work?
>
> editor ... "For major revisions, adaptations, etc., that substant
Actually, don't the definitions of Editor and Editor of an Compilation in RDA I.3.1 allow a cataloger the option to decide that editing or compilation rises to the level of authorship of a new work?editor ... "For major revisions, adaptations, etc., that substantially change the nature and content
lf Of Jack Wu
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 1:00 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Editor as main entry
Thanks Adam for confirming this exception.
Jack
>>> "Adam L. Schiff"
>>> mailto:asch...@u.washington.edu>> 10/8/2012 2:43
>>&g
Thanks Adam for confirming this exception.
Jack
>>> "Adam L. Schiff" 10/8/2012 2:43 PM >>>
Yes, the authorized access point for motion pictures and other moving
image works is an exception and is constructed of the title only. Serials
are not always an exception. If a creator is responsibl
Yes, the authorized access point for motion pictures and other moving
image works is an exception and is constructed of the title only. Serials
are not always an exception. If a creator is responsible for all issues
of a serial, it would be named using the creator combined with the title.
Th
GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Editor as main entry
Because the rule of three from AACR2 is gone, it doesn't matter how many
creators there are for a work. In RDA the authorized access point for a
work is the combination of the first named or prominently named creator
and the preferred title fo
Yes, I do remember now. This is a change on account of the rule of three. In
RDA is there an exception or another rule that governs the entry under title
for video recordings, serials...
Thanks,
Jack
Jack Wu
Franciscan University of Steubenville
>>> "Adam L. Schiff" 10/8/2012 1:27 PM >>>
B
Because the rule of three from AACR2 is gone, it doesn't matter how many
creators there are for a work. In RDA the authorized access point for a
work is the combination of the first named or prominently named creator
and the preferred title for the work. Hence:
AACR2
245 00 $a Title Z / $c
We should distinguish between the *concept *of main entry, which denotes
the idea of primary responsibility for a work and thus serves to link
authors to their works (and which, of course, need not be called "main
entry"), and the different way(s) in which the concept has been implemented
and/or re
On 2012-10-08 00:38, Keith Trickey wrote:
Point of order! "Main entry" was adopted by AACR2 -
Whatever term is used. scholars have been citing sources
by author/title for centuries.
I begain typing "main entry" at the top of a unit card
since the 1940s.
If we wish to :play welll with others",
Whether main entry idea has passed its time I leave for others more
knowledgeable to debate on. In the 1960s one of my library school teachers
proposed we just sidestep this whole issue of authorship and make title the
main entry. As far as I can remember, in the case of diffused authorship, in
On 08/10/2012 09:38, Keith Trickey wrote:
> Point of order! "Main entry" was adopted by AACR2 - Eric Hunter argued
> against it at a JSC meeting in the 1970s in York and was timed out. It
> goes back to catalogue card days - when full bibliographic data was
> entered on the "main entry card" and t
Am 08.10.2012 09:38, schrieb Keith Trickey:
>
> The cataloguer's arrogance is part of the "main entry" concept. The
> searcher approaches with catalogue with whatever information they
> have - could be author or title or words from title etc. For the
> searcher the information they use to access t
___
From: Amanda Xu
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Sent: Sunday, 7 October 2012, 20:14
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Editor as main entry
Main entry is like a collar of your shirt. By pulling the collar, the whole
shirt can be neatly pulled out of a pile from your laundry baske
On 2012-10-07 12:14, Amanda Xu wrote:
In general, editors are considered as compiler. His or her role in
the creation of the intellectual content is compilation, not original
one. That's why title is considered more important than other
controlled access points of a bib.
Here I think we libr
Main entry is like a collar of your shirt. By pulling the collar, the whole
shirt can be neatly pulled out of a pile from your laundry basket with sleeves
and body part of the shirt lined neatly on each side.
It's an AACR2 concept. Its creation is the intellectual work of Cataloger's
judgem
So in this regard it's exactly like AACR2?? Somehow while the short explanation
given here is clear, I must admit what the RDA says is confusing to me.
Jack
>>> "Adam L. Schiff" 10/4/2012 5:57 PM >>>
Editors are not considered creators in RDA, nor are they considered other
persons, families,
Editors are not considered creators in RDA, nor are they considered other
persons, families, or corporate bodies associated with the work, so they
cannot be tagged in 1XX.
RDA 20.2 says:
A contributor is a person, family, or corporate body contributing to the
realization of a work through an
Dear RDA-L readers,
Although RDA to my knowledge makes no mention of the concept of main entry,
discussion has taken place whether a heading for an editor might be tagged 100,
effectively designating that heading as main entry.
Among other concerns, cuttering is affected. CSM G 53 Determining
20 matches
Mail list logo
