Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote: 1. Are we allowed to use, then, the more specific terms indented underneath the relationship designator performer (which is in bold), or are we to use performer only, to cover all those types of situations represented by the more specific indented not in bold terms? The indented terms are also available for use: so for an actor, you can use actor or the broader term, performer. If we can use the more specific indented terms, how were we supposed to know that? I wasn't sure if we are allowed to use these indented terms, or if they're just further (and more specific) examples of what is meant by the bold faced code. If we can use these more specific indented terms, I think it might be helpful if RDA specifically said that following the definition of a bold faced term (or you can use these more specific terms, or something to that effect). I agree these could be formatted better for scanning: bold's easier to see than italic. But as to the last point, there's this paragraph under I.1: Use relationship designators at the level of specificity that is considered appropriate for the purposes of the agency creating the data. For example, the relationship between a screenplay and the screenwriter responsible for the work can be recorded using either the specific relationship designator *screenwriter* or the more general relationship designator *author*. Are we able to use relationship designators or terms such as music copyist in a |e if they have a MARC 3-letter code, even if the term does not appear in RDA? Terms can come from outside of RDA (quoting I.1 again: If none of the terms listed in this appendix is appropriate or sufficiently specific, use another concise term to indicate the nature of the relationship). My opinion on code versus spelled out form: if using something from the MARC relator term list, add to the record as a $4 code. RDA 0.12 says that is using a list of terms from outside of RDA (like for relationship designators), these may be given provided the encoding scheme is identified. Codes in $4s are as close as you can get to a flashing neon sign telling folks where the term (i.e., code) came from. 2. I have a print series which contains lectures, can |e performer be used for lecturers/speakers when the lecture is in print form? I tend to think of performer as limited to someone we can see and hear doing their craft. Words on a page don't cut it in that respect; the lecturer performed an authorial role to create the text. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Thank you Mark. I did re-read Appendix I.1 after I had already sent my question and realized that yes, it does say that you can use the more specific terms. Wish I had realized that before I sent my question! In the case of the $4 code, you're saying you would use just the $4 code, right? (And not a combination of $4 plus $e using the terminology accompanying the code in the MARC Code List for Relators?). I don't have a problem with using just the $4 code, I just wanted to be clear that you are saying you would just use the $4 code alone in cases where a term doesn't yet exist in the text of RDA. I did end up using author for the print lecture series I was asking about below. Thanks again for your help! -Dana From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 4:29 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote: 1. Are we allowed to use, then, the more specific terms indented underneath the relationship designator performer (which is in bold), or are we to use performer only, to cover all those types of situations represented by the more specific indented not in bold terms? The indented terms are also available for use: so for an actor, you can use actor or the broader term, performer. If we can use the more specific indented terms, how were we supposed to know that? I wasn't sure if we are allowed to use these indented terms, or if they're just further (and more specific) examples of what is meant by the bold faced code. If we can use these more specific indented terms, I think it might be helpful if RDA specifically said that following the definition of a bold faced term (or you can use these more specific terms, or something to that effect). I agree these could be formatted better for scanning: bold's easier to see than italic. But as to the last point, there's this paragraph under I.1: Use relationship designators at the level of specificity that is considered appropriate for the purposes of the agency creating the data. For example, the relationship between a screenplay and the screenwriter responsible for the work can be recorded using either the specific relationship designator screenwriter or the more general relationship designator author. Are we able to use relationship designators or terms such as music copyist in a |e if they have a MARC 3-letter code, even if the term does not appear in RDA? Terms can come from outside of RDA (quoting I.1 again: If none of the terms listed in this appendix is appropriate or sufficiently specific, use another concise term to indicate the nature of the relationship). My opinion on code versus spelled out form: if using something from the MARC relator term list, add to the record as a $4 code. RDA 0.12 says that is using a list of terms from outside of RDA (like for relationship designators), these may be given provided the encoding scheme is identified. Codes in $4s are as close as you can get to a flashing neon sign telling folks where the term (i.e., code) came from. 2. I have a print series which contains lectures, can |e performer be used for lecturers/speakers when the lecture is in print form? I tend to think of performer as limited to someone we can see and hear doing their craft. Words on a page don't cut it in that respect; the lecturer performed an authorial role to create the text. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote: In the case of the $4 code, you’re saying you would use just the $4 code, right? (And not a combination of $4 plus $e using the terminology accompanying the code in the MARC Code List for Relators?). I don’t have a problem with using just the $4 code, I just wanted to be clear that you are saying you would just use the $4 code alone in cases where a term doesn’t yet exist in the text of RDA. Yes, I just use the code alone. I toyed around with employing both $e/$j terms and $4 codes with name headings, but I came away not seeing any advantages to it. As a side note, my general pecking order for these name heading designators is: RDA's appendix; if none are found there, look in the MARC relator code list; if none are found there, I go back to RDA and use one of its high-level terms (e.g., creator). There are a few exceptions to this pattern; the high-level term publisher is one I go to right if I'm tracing one of those in the record. And I realize that I could look at other lists too, but I have neither the time or energy for that nor is there any good way in MARC to point at the $4 or $e/$j and say, Hey, this code/term came from that list way over there. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
For what it's worth, PCC guidelines say to use the terms, not the codes. Adam Schiff ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, Dana Van Meter wrote: Thank you Mark. I did re-read Appendix I.1 after I had already sent my question and realized that yes, it does say that you can use the more specific terms. Wish I had realized that before I sent my question! In the case of the $4 code, you're saying you would use just the $4 code, right? (And not a combination of $4 plus $e using the terminology accompanying the code in the MARC Code List for Relators?). I don't have a problem with using just the $4 code, I just wanted to be clear that you are saying you would just use the $4 code alone in cases where a term doesn't yet exist in the text of RDA. I did end up using author for the print lecture series I was asking about below. Thanks again for your help! -Dana From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 4:29 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? Dana Van Meter vanme...@ias.edu wrote: 1. Are we allowed to use, then, the more specific terms indented underneath the relationship designator performer (which is in bold), or are we to use performer only, to cover all those types of situations represented by the more specific indented not in bold terms? The indented terms are also available for use: so for an actor, you can use actor or the broader term, performer. If we can use the more specific indented terms, how were we supposed to know that? I wasn't sure if we are allowed to use these indented terms, or if they're just further (and more specific) examples of what is meant by the bold faced code. If we can use these more specific indented terms, I think it might be helpful if RDA specifically said that following the definition of a bold faced term (or you can use these more specific terms, or something to that effect). I agree these could be formatted better for scanning: bold's easier to see than italic. But as to the last point, there's this paragraph under I.1: Use relationship designators at the level of specificity that is considered appropriate for the purposes of the agency creating the data. For example, the relationship between a screenplay and the screenwriter responsible for the work can be recorded using either the specific relationship designator screenwriter or the more general relationship designator author. Are we able to use relationship designators or terms such as music copyist in a |e if they have a MARC 3-letter code, even if the term does not appear in RDA? Terms can come from outside of RDA (quoting I.1 again: If none of the terms listed in this appendix is appropriate or sufficiently specific, use another concise term to indicate the nature of the relationship). My opinion on code versus spelled out form: if using something from the MARC relator term list, add to the record as a $4 code. RDA 0.12 says that is using a list of terms from outside of RDA (like for relationship designators), these may be given provided the encoding scheme is identified. Codes in $4s are as close as you can get to a flashing neon sign telling folks where the term (i.e., code) came from. 2. I have a print series which contains lectures, can |e performer be used for lecturers/speakers when the lecture is in print form? I tend to think of performer as limited to someone we can see and hear doing their craft. Words on a page don't cut it in that respect; the lecturer performed an authorial role to create the text. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
This answer prompts some questions for me. 1. Are we allowed to use, then, the more specific terms indented underneath the relationship designator performer (which is in bold), or are we to use performer only, to cover all those types of situations represented by the more specific indented not in bold terms? If we can use the more specific indented terms, how were we supposed to know that? I wasn't sure if we are allowed to use these indented terms, or if they're just further (and more specific) examples of what is meant by the bold faced code. If we can use these more specific indented terms, I think it might be helpful if RDA specifically said that following the definition of a bold faced term (or you can use these more specific terms, or something to that effect). Using the example of the term author, I see that there are MARC relator codes for the more specific terms librettist[lbt] and lyricist [lyr], but there isn't a MARC code for screenwriter, so I would not automatically assume that I could use those more specific indented terms as relator terms in a |e. There also seem to be MARC relator codes for terms which are not named in RDA, such as Music copyist [mcp]. Are we able to use relationship designators or terms such as music copyist in a |e if they have a MARC 3-letter code, even if the term does not appear in RDA? 2. I have a print series which contains lectures, can |e performer be used for lecturers/speakers when the lecture is in print form? Thank you for your help. Dana Van Meter Catalog Librarian Historical Studies-Social Science Library Institute for Advanced Study Princeton, NJ 08540 vanme...@ias.edu -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Brenndorfer, Thomas Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2013 12:10 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Browning, Sommer [sommer.brown...@ucdenver.edu] Sent: April-05-13 5:21 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? I've searched the list and couldn't find if these questions had been asked before so here goes. 1. We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have the lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relator term be? Is $e creator sufficient? Though he isn't the creator of the DVD.? He is a kind of performer and author.? Using $e lecturer seems silly. The presence in the 100 field also would mean that the name would form part of the authorized access point for the work, but this is not appropriate for moving image works (Great Courses DVDs are cataloged primarily as moving image DVD videos, with the course guide being accompanying material). For moving images works, only the preferred title for the DVD is used alone for the authorized access point for the work (RDA 6.27.1.3), so the lecturer would not be found in the 100 field. As a lecturer, the person would be contributing to the expression, essentially as a 'performer'. In the list of designators under 'performer' are 'speaker' or 'teacher'. The designator ' speaker' is the best fit, as RDA refers specifically to the delivery of a lecture (as opposed to a 'teacher' who is providing instructions or a demonstration). The lecturer is also the writer of the course guide, so that is a clear work relationship. Instead of a contributor to the expression, the lecturer is the Creator of a work, specifically an 'author.' Adding these two designators to the lecturer in 700 field would be the best fit for the two roles: $e speaker $e author 2. Related note: Can the relationship designator just be left off entirely? Yes, but the person would not be found in the 100 field because the description is primarily for a moving image work. A name in a 700 field can have designators supporting relationships to works or expressions in the resource, but the 100 field is reserved for allowable names that can form part of the authorized access point for the work. Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Hi I think we should not treat this as DVD of motion picture or musical performance. We have to know the content of the DVD first. Since it is a kind of teaching/learning materials, the DVD may be a recording of lectures. In this context, I think assigning access points to the agents who are responsible for the creation of the course materials and the performer (the person(s) giving the lectures) is more appropriate to the users than the agents who are responsible for the creation (producing) the DVD. My 2 cents. Regards Henry On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 5:21 AM, Browning, Sommer sommer.brown...@ucdenver.edu wrote: Hi everyone, ** ** I’ve searched the list and couldn’t find if these questions had been asked before so here goes. ** ** **1. **We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have the lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relator term be? Is $e creator sufficient? Though he isn’t the creator of the DVD…? He is a kind of performer and author…? Using $e lecturer seems silly. ** ** **2. **Related note: Can the relationship designator just be left off entirely? ** ** **3. **Does anyone have a good example of a mixed media RDA record? One combining both DVD and course guide, for instance. ** ** Thank you! ** ** Sommer
[RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Hi everyone, I've searched the list and couldn't find if these questions had been asked before so here goes. 1. We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have the lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relator term be? Is $e creator sufficient? Though he isn't the creator of the DVD...? He is a kind of performer and author...? Using $e lecturer seems silly. 2. Related note: Can the relationship designator just be left off entirely? 3. Does anyone have a good example of a mixed media RDA record? One combining both DVD and course guide, for instance. Thank you! Sommer
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
How about written and narrated by? Jinny Wesson Library Resource Center Library Coordinator Technical Services/Cataloging 3000 NE 4th St. Renton, WA 98056 (425) 235-2331 jwes...@rtc.edu mailto:jwes...@rtc.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Browning, Sommer Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 2:21 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? Hi everyone, I’ve searched the list and couldn’t find if these questions had been asked before so here goes. 1. We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have the lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relator term be? Is $e creator sufficient? Though he isn’t the creator of the DVD…? He is a kind of performer and author…? Using $e lecturer seems silly. 2. Related note: Can the relationship designator just be left off entirely? 3. Does anyone have a good example of a mixed media RDA record? One combining both DVD and course guide, for instance. Thank you! Sommer This message has been scanned by McAfee EWS3200 at the RTC internet gateway.
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
Sommer Browning said:
1. We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have th=
e lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relato=
r term be?
I suspect we would consider the lecturer to be just one contributor to
something having mixed respossibility, and would make him a 700, with
title main entry.
In terms of relator code or term, you might consider:
$4spk Speaker
$4tch Teacher
$espeaker
$eteacher
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record?
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Browning, Sommer [sommer.brown...@ucdenver.edu] Sent: April-05-13 5:21 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Can Lecturer be used as a valid relator term and do you have a good example of a DVD + Book RDA record? I’ve searched the list and couldn’t find if these questions had been asked before so here goes. 1. We are cataloging a Great Courses DVD and course guide. We have the lecturer and course guide author in the 100 field. What should his relator term be? Is $e creator sufficient? Though he isn’t the creator of the DVD…? He is a kind of performer and author…? Using $e lecturer seems silly. The presence in the 100 field also would mean that the name would form part of the authorized access point for the work, but this is not appropriate for moving image works (Great Courses DVDs are cataloged primarily as moving image DVD videos, with the course guide being accompanying material). For moving images works, only the preferred title for the DVD is used alone for the authorized access point for the work (RDA 6.27.1.3), so the lecturer would not be found in the 100 field. As a lecturer, the person would be contributing to the expression, essentially as a 'performer'. In the list of designators under 'performer' are 'speaker' or 'teacher'. The designator ' speaker' is the best fit, as RDA refers specifically to the delivery of a lecture (as opposed to a 'teacher' who is providing instructions or a demonstration). The lecturer is also the writer of the course guide, so that is a clear work relationship. Instead of a contributor to the expression, the lecturer is the Creator of a work, specifically an 'author.' Adding these two designators to the lecturer in 700 field would be the best fit for the two roles: $e speaker $e author 2. Related note: Can the relationship designator just be left off entirely? Yes, but the person would not be found in the 100 field because the description is primarily for a moving image work. A name in a 700 field can have designators supporting relationships to works or expressions in the resource, but the 100 field is reserved for allowable names that can form part of the authorized access point for the work. Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
