Re: [RDA-L] Uniform titles (was (Online) qualifier for series)

[J. McRee Elrod]

Karen Coyle said:

RDA doesn't define a uniform title, but instead (well, I think of it 
as instead) has title of the work.
 
It seems to me preferred title is the RDA core element which is most
like uniform title in AACR2.  Except that it applies only to
distinctive uniform titles.  What about classical music form uniform
titles (the only 240s our clients like), and voluminous author form
uniform titles such as Works which fewer like?  Presumably
preferred title takes care of Romeo and Juliet but not Works,
Plays, Poems, etc.

Our clients would react very negatively to the same title appearing
twice in a bibliographic record, as preferred title and as title
proper.  A majority of items catalogued represent the only expression
-- manifestion of a work, and often the only work by an author.  

Some clients even object to 130s and 240s in languages which differ
from the 245.  There were a help filing cards, but accomplish little
now.  They are better as alternate acess points 246s, and in subjectc
and added entries.

I can only hope preferred title will be in an authority record, not
in individual bibliographic records, in most cases; particularly when
identical to the title proper.

I suppose we could suppres them in export, unless classed M, BS,
782-788, or 221-229.


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

Re: [RDA-L] Uniform titles (was (Online) qualifier for series)

[Paradis Daniel]

Mac said:

It seems to me preferred title is the RDA core element which is most
like uniform title in AACR2.  Except that it applies only to
distinctive uniform titles.  What about classical music form uniform
titles (the only 240s our clients like), and voluminous author form
uniform titles such as Works which fewer like?  Presumably
preferred title takes care of Romeo and Juliet but not Works,
Plays, Poems, etc.

In music, the “preferred title” corresponds to the “initial title element” in 
AACR2, i.e. the basic title without additions. These additions (e.g. medium of 
performance, number, key) are treated as distinct elements in RDA. 
Compilations, as aggregate works, also have preferred titles in RDA. “Works” or 
“Plays” are examples of such titles.

I can only hope preferred title will be in an authority record, not
in individual bibliographic records, in most cases; particularly when
identical to the title proper.

The December 2008 draft of RDA includes the following text under instruction 
6.0:

Preferred access points [changed to “authorized access points” at the last JSC 
meeting] representing works and expressions can be used for different purposes. 
They provide the means for:
...
b) identifying a work when the title by which it is known differs from the 
title proper of the resource being described

Given that, in an implementation of RDA in current database structures, the 
preferred title for the work would appear in bibliographic records only as part 
of an access point (130, 1XX/240 or 7XX), I take this as an indication that in 
such an implementation, a 130 or 240 field would not be included in 
bibliographic records if it were identical to the 245. In a relational or 
object-oriented database structure with separate records for each of the Group 
1 entities, I don’t see how work records could exist without a “Preferred title 
of the work.”


Daniel Paradis
 
Service de catalogage
Pavillon Roger-Gaudry, local L-981
Universite de Montreal
C.P. 6128, succursale Centre-ville
Montreal QC H3C 3J7
Telephone: 514 343-6111, ext. 4019
Fax: 514 343-6402
Email: daniel.para...@umontreal.ca
http://www.bib.umontreal.ca