The responses listed below have been added to the JSC web site:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/workingnew.html or
http://www.rda-jsc.org/working1.html (click on proposal or paper).
Regards, Judy Kuhagen
JSC Secretary
= = = = =
6JSC/ACOC/5/ALA response
6JSC/ACOC/6/ALA response
6JSC/ALA/19/LC response
6J
SIGNOFF RDA-L
Certainly if someone calls him/herself an editor or compiler but is actually an
author or creator, that person is the creator of the work. For example, authors
of bibliographies sometimes call themselves editors when they're actually the
author/compiler/creator of the bibliography. An example is
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
Adam Schiff posted:
>RDA
>
>100 1_ $a Author A.
>245 10 $a Title Z / $c by Authors A, B, C, and D.
I suspect there will be mistaken entry under the author of the first
title in a collection, as opposed to title (AACR2/RDA) or editor
(scholarly practice).
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m
Note, however, that this is an exception to RDA 6.27.1.3, Collaborative Works,
and only applies to that instruction, which gives guidance for collaboratively
produced motion pictures. This of course covers most of them, but a motion
picture wholly created by one person, family, or corporate body
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
This message has been sent to multiple lists. Our apologies for any duplicate
cross-posting.
***Call for proposals***
The ALCTS CaMMS Cataloging & Classification Research
Interest Group is seeking proposals for presentations at its ALA Mid-Winter
meeting in Seattle, WA. The meeting will be o
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
As I understand RDA, editors are not considered a creators. Is this correct?
If so, title access point (main entries, for lack of a better term), are the
entity one would create a "book number from.
Helen E. Gbala
Supervisor Cataloging/Processing
College of DuPage Library
630-942-2663
gba...@co
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
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 the other cards relating to that item were listed
19 matches
Mail list logo
