Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors

[Don Charuk]

We are trying to come to grips with this issue as staff adjust to some of the 
peculiarities of 
RDA. I would agree that a creator of an illustrated book sans text should be 
regarded as the "creator"
and given the designator "artist". Yet, if you read LC-PCC PS for rule 18.5.1.3 
it suggests that illustrators/artists of
juvenile material will be coded in the MARC 700 tag with the designator 
"illustrator" This is exampled in 
http://lccn.loc.gov/2012944944.  This suggests LC would never regard an 
illustrated children's book as being created by
an artist. I may be wrong in this interpretation and I hope I am. I believe 
this relegates some artists to a "second class" status.

[RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[Heidrun Wiesenmüller]

The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression 
level. Yet, in 7.16.1.3 we have the following example, which does not 
only say that the expression contains a bibliography (which is fine by 
me), but also on which pages this can be found, which seems rather odd:


Bibliography: pages 859–910

How can page numbers be on expression level? Wouldn't they be on the 
level of the manifestation, as the page numbers will vary with the 
format, font size etc. of the manifestation?


Heidrun

--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi

Re: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[Deborah Fritz]

Excellent point.

This was raised with CC:DA to be brought to the attention of the JSC. See:
http://wikis.ala.org/ccda/index.php/6._Bibliographies_as_content_of_an_Expression

Deborah

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@marcofquality.com
www.marcofquality.com

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:28 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression level. Yet, 
in 7.16.1.3 we have the following example, which does not only say that the 
expression contains a bibliography (which is fine by me), but also on which 
pages this can be found, which seems rather odd:

Bibliography: pages 859–910

How can page numbers be on expression level? Wouldn't they be on the level of 
the manifestation, as the page numbers will vary with the format, font size 
etc. of the manifestation?

Heidrun

--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, 
Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi

Re: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[Robert Maxwell]

Heidrun,

You're correct, page numbers are manifestation level information. This has been 
pointed out before, but I think the information is thought so useful that it 
continues to be recorded as you see. RDA could correct this by putting the 
instruction for recording the location of a bibliography within a resource in 
the section on manifestations.

Bob


Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to 
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.


From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Heidrun Wiesenmüller 
[wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 7:27 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression
level. Yet, in 7.16.1.3 we have the following example, which does not
only say that the expression contains a bibliography (which is fine by
me), but also on which pages this can be found, which seems rather odd:

Bibliography: pages 859–910

How can page numbers be on expression level? Wouldn't they be on the
level of the manifestation, as the page numbers will vary with the
format, font size etc. of the manifestation?

Heidrun

--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi

Re: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[Heidrun Wiesenmüller]

Deborah,

Seems I've missed the earlier discussion. Many thanks for the link. It's 
good to see that a fast track proposal is already under way.


Heidrun



Excellent point.

This was raised with CC:DA to be brought to the attention of the JSC. See:
http://wikis.ala.org/ccda/index.php/6._Bibliographies_as_content_of_an_Expression

Deborah

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@marcofquality.com
www.marcofquality.com

-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:28 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression level. Yet, 
in 7.16.1.3 we have the following example, which does not only say that the expression 
contains a bibliography (which is fine by me), but also on which pages this can be found, 
which seems rather odd:

Bibliography: pages 859–910

How can page numbers be on expression level? Wouldn't they be on the level of 
the manifestation, as the page numbers will vary with the format, font size 
etc. of the manifestation?

Heidrun

--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, 
Germany www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi



--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi

Re: [RDA-L] Jurisdiction in imprint

[M. E.]

J. McRee Elrod  wrote:

> In addition to the advantage of transcribing or supplying jurisdiction
> in a form patrons can read, we do not know (do we?) that Bibframe will
> have an equivalent to 008/15-17 Place of jurisdiction.  Might having
> that data in imprint be even more important with Bibframe?
>

I don't see that portion of the 008 field listed here (<
http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html>), which is odd since I think it
would square pretty easily with the 260 $a/264 -1 $a given on that list.

-- 
Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] Jurisdiction in imprint

[M. E.]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 10:05 AM, M. E.  wrote:

> I don't see that portion of the 008 field listed here (<
> http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html>), which is odd since I think it
> would square pretty easily with the 260 $a/264 -1 $a given on that list.
>

I should add that the BIBFRAME group is probably still working on this
point.  With multiple place-names possible with the imprint and the first
one listed coded in the 008, there may be other issues to tackle, like
matching the codes in the 044 with the list in the 260/264.


Mark K. Ehlert
Minitex

Re: [RDA-L] Jurisdiction in imprint

[J. McRee Elrod]

Mark said:

>I don't see that portion of the 008 field listed here (<
>http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html>), which is odd since I think it
>would square pretty easily with the 260 $a/264 -1 $a given on that list.

Fixed fields 008/15-1,7 when correctly coded. always has jurisdiction.

As recorded by most North American cataloguers (mistakenly I think) 260
$a and 264 1 $a often lack jurisdiction.  Cities whose jurisdiction is
known within the Beltway, may not be known in China.

The Australians have a list of cities to consult in leaving out
jurisdiction.  Most North Americans are wildly inconsistent.  Why not
just enter it?  What's to be gained by omitting it?


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[J. McRee Elrod]

Heidurn said:

>The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression 
>level. Yet, in 7.16.1.3 we have ...[an] example, which does not 
>only say that the expression contains a bibliography (which is fine by 
>me), but also on which pages this can be found ...

You are right of course.  

Since neither MARC nor Bibframe (to date) have expression level
records or data, what difference does it make?  In MARC this data
would be in the Manifestation record, and in Bibframe in Instance data
I assume, although some Expressions are Works in Bibframe.  

Unless/until we have vastly different cataloguing input interfaces,
the WEMI arrangement of RDA continues to be a distraction.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

[RDA-L] RIMMF2 : inputting RDA data without MARC

[Deborah Fritz]

RDA-L folks,

 

We would like to announce that RIMMF version 2 is now available for
download:

http://www.marcofquality.com/wiki/rimmf/doku.php?id=rimmf

 

RIMMF is available under a Creative Commons license (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) and
runs on Windows. The first version of RIMMF required users to register on
our wiki; we have removed that requirement now. This version includes some
very basic language support for French and German, and  fairly solid mapping
from MARC Authority Records. For those of you not familiar with RIMMF, some
brief background information is appended below.

 

We hope you have a chance to experiment with RIMMF and *see* how different
RDA thinking is, minus MARC; and please, if you do play with it, let us know
what you think of it. 

 

RIMMF Background

 

As some of you already know, we (TMQ) began working on an
RDA 'Input form' about two years ago, as a visualization tool to help me
(Deborah) see how entering RDA data would work in a world without MARC. This
'input form' grew into a piece of software that we named RIMMF (RDA in Many
Metadata Formats). 

 

In 2012, we began to demonstrate RIMMF to libraries and
present it at conferences. LC thought it was a suitable example of a
prototype input system for the RDA elements and relationships, and asked to
us return and present it to a large contingent of their cataloging staff as
a "Digital Future and You" presentation.

 

That spring we took RIMMF on tour to 6 national libraries
and one consortium in Europe. At Summer ALA, we presented the program at the
US National Libraries RDA Forum. At ALA Midwinter earlier this year, we
presented RIMMF to the Copy Cataloging Interest Group, and to a meeting of
the Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access.

 

Throughout this period we have demonstrated the program to
numerous small groups in live, web-based demos, getting feedback, opinions,
advice, and the like. RIMMF has also become prominent in my Rudimentary RDA
workshop, to show how different RDA thinking will be, once we are no longer
tangled up in MARC. 

 

What we have not done, until now, was send out a public
notice to this list that this software is available, but we think (hope) we
have it 'good enough' now to let you all know about it. Have fun.

 

Deborah

 

-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  

Deborah Fritz

TMQ, Inc.

debo...@marcofquality.com

www.marcofquality.com

 

Re: [RDA-L] Illustrators as creators, not contributors

[Trina Pundurs]

I can see how one would arrive at that reading; I just never took it to
mean that LC would never recognize an artist as a creator for children's
materials.  The more sensible reading, I think--perhaps a bit of a stretch
given the current wording of the PS--is that IF there are illustrations in
the resource BUT they aren't so predominant or integral as to regard the
illustrator as a creator, THEN put the AAP for the illustrator in a 700
field with the relationship designator "illustrator."  I would still rely
on 19.2 for determining who is the creator in any case.

Trina

Trina Pundurs
Serials Cataloger
Library Collection Services
University of California, Berkeley
tpund...@library.berkeley.edu
http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1990

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 5:56 AM, Don Charuk  wrote:

> We are trying to come to grips with this issue as staff adjust to some of
> the peculiarities of
> RDA. I would agree that a creator of an illustrated book sans text should
> be regarded as the "creator"
> and given the designator "artist". Yet, if you read LC-PCC PS for rule
> 18.5.1.3 it suggests that illustrators/artists of
> juvenile material will be coded in the MARC 700 tag with the designator
> "illustrator" This is exampled in
> http://lccn.loc.gov/2012944944.  This suggests LC would never regard an
> illustrated children's book as being created by
> an artist. I may be wrong in this interpretation and I hope I am. I
> believe this relegates some artists to a "second class" status.
>

Re: [RDA-L] 7.16.1.3: Can page numbers be on expression level?

[Heidrun Wiesenmüller]

Mac,

Granted - it doesn't have any practical implications, at least at the 
moment. Still, as RDA claims to be structured according to FRBR, one 
can't help noticing such inconsistencies.


It's also quite interesting as it shows how difficult it is to untangle 
the information we are used to record, according to WEMI principles. We 
used to think of a note like "Bibliography: p. x - y" as only one bit of 
information. But according to FRBR-think it's two different things, one 
on the expression level and one on the work level. There is, of course, 
room for debate as to whether it is necessary and helpful to separate 
the two bits of information.


This is certainly not the only FRBR issue in RDA. For example, I really 
don't see why affiliation is treated in chapter 9 (Identifying persons) 
instead of chapter 32 (Related corporate bodies). To me, affiliation is 
not an attribute of a person, but a relationship between a person and a 
corporate body. In the German authority file, there is even a link from 
the authority record of the person to the corporate body which the 
person belongs to.


I believe this has also been noticed before, but I haven't heard of any 
plans to rectify it.


Heidrun


On 26.06.2013 18:43, J. McRee Elrod wrote:

Heidurn said:


The element "Supplementary content" is supposed to be on expression
level. Yet, in 7.16.1.3 we have ...[an] example, which does not
only say that the expression contains a bibliography (which is fine by
me), but also on which pages this can be found ...

You are right of course.

Since neither MARC nor Bibframe (to date) have expression level
records or data, what difference does it make?  In MARC this data
would be in the Manifestation record, and in Bibframe in Instance data
I assume, although some Expressions are Works in Bibframe.

Unless/until we have vastly different cataloguing input interfaces,
the WEMI arrangement of RDA continues to be a distraction.


__   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
   {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
   ___} |__ \__




--
-
Prof. Heidrun Wiesenmueller M.A.
Stuttgart Media University
Faculty of Information and Communication
Wolframstr. 32, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
www.hdm-stuttgart.de/bi