Yep. This makes recording statement of responsibility for DVDs even more
straightforward-- NOT.
This is another area in RDA that will need to be looked at more thoroughly once
the May 14 release is out.
Andrea
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA
Jim,
The element being discussed is the Statement of responsibility relating to
title proper (RDA 2.4.2). So, before you get to this element, you have
already selected the title proper. Then, you follow 2.4.2.4: "If a
statement of responsibility relating to title proper appears on the source
of
For a further wrinkle, I would also suggest to all that the next time you watch
a movie, look at the credits and try to ascertain what the first statement is.
And for extra credit, you can then figure out which of those are "identifying
creators of the intellectual or artistic content"
Greta d
Andrea Leigh said:
>Yep. This makes recording statement of responsibility for DVDs even
>more straightforward-- NOT.
Some during the test period interpreted RDA to mean DVDs have no
statement of responsibility (apart from "a film by Tom Jones"). with
all noncast credits in 508. Motion pictures,
Hi, all
I have two questions about authorized access points for
person/family/corporate body.
Q1:
RDA 18.3 says that creator is a core element. If there is more than one,
only the principle or the first-named creator is required. It also says
that other person/family/corporate body associated wi
Hi Joan,
Regarding Q2, I think if the dates of birth/death are not needed to
distinguish the person (and therefore not included in the *authorized
access point* element), the dates would still be recorded as a separate
element (e.g. MARC 046).
-Arthur Liu
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Joa
Hi, Liu
So it does not have to appear in 100/700 fields if it is not needed to
distinguish...But it will be encoded in 046 field as a core element.
Right?
Thank you.
Joan
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Arthur Liu wrote:
> Hi Joan,
>
> Regarding Q2, I think if the dates of birth/death are
Hi Joan,
That's my understanding, yes. (I'm a recently finished MLS student, so take
this with a grain of salt.)
Also, note that the associated LC-PCC PS for 9.19.1.3 says to add the dates
to all new authority records even if not needed to distinguish (in other
words, apply the option).
-Arthur
If an "other" person/family/corporate body associated with the work is used to
construct the authorized access point representing the work, then that *one*
person, family or corporate body associated with the work is the core element.
Another way to state this is to say whoever became the main e
Thanks a lot. Arthur.
Joan
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Arthur Liu wrote:
> Hi Joan,
>
> That's my understanding, yes. (I'm a recently finished MLS student, so
> take this with a grain of salt.)
>
> Also, note that the associated LC-PCC PS for 9.19.1.3 says to add the
> dates to all new a
Big thanks to Thomas. I have bothered you several times :)
Joan
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Brenndorfer, Thomas <
tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca> wrote:
> If an "other" person/family/corporate body associated with the work is
> used to construct the authorized access point representing
> -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: May-13-13 2:01 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] authorized access point for person
Thomas,
What you said about films is not quite totally correct. Appendix I does
have a relationship designator under creator of work:
filmmaker A person, family, or corporate body responsible for creating an
independent or personal film. A filmmaker is individually responsible for
the conce
Is a filmmaker (a corporate body) considered to be a creator under this
rule?
d) *Works that result from the collective activity of a performing
group as a whole *where the responsibility of the group goes beyond that of
mere performance, execution, etc.
I tried to figure out any examples. Bu
Mac,
You keep referring to "records" and as I understand Bibframe there will
no longer be "records. There will be data points and triplets instead. This
will be a critical difference and as Deborah says about RDA thinking will be
even more true about Bibframe. This frame shift from reco
Sorry. The question should be: any examples under this rule for a corporate
body considered to be a creator? I try to understand the rule.
d) *Works that result from the collective activity of a performing
group as a whole *where the responsibility of the group goes beyond that of
mere perfor
Just sticking with moving image works, and the exception for a creator of a
moving image work with the designator "filmmaker"...
It seems possible that a corporate body can indeed by a "filmmaker" and
therefore a Creator and therefore a core element, along with the first part of
the authorized
Arthur cited the LC/PCC PS:
>Also, note that the associated LC-PCC PS for 9.19.1.3 says to add the dates
>to all new authority records even if not needed to distinguish (in other
>words, apply the option).
Very wise. How is the cataloguer to know if another author with the
same name will apper la
Michael Mitchell said:
> You keep referring to "records" and as I understand Bibframe there
>will no longer be "records.
Presumably there will be "something" which contains the data
transcribed from Instances. While entry points may be linked to,
rather than contained in, that data; there is th
I'd like someone to confirm my understanding of the rules. The AACR2 rules for
title main entry are as follows:
AACR2 21.1C.
Entry under Title
21.1C1. Enter a work under its title proper or, when appropriate, uniform
title (see chapter 25) if:
a) the personal authorship is unknown (see 21.5) o
I used to create home movies and student films, but I would not consider myself
a filmmaker, any more than someone who writes a short story as part of an
assignment for a class would necessarily think of themselves as a writer. I
would tend to think someone who puts up a YouTube video they shot
>
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Shorten, Jay
> Sent: May-13-13 5:05 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: [RDA-L] Title main entry equivalent in RDA?
>
> I'd like someone to confirm my unde
Jay Shorten said:
>Therefore I conclude that most, works from a corporate body will be
>corporate body main entry, with perhaps the exception being a
>document that some identified person wrote, or co-wrote
>(identification coming from either the document itself or from
>reference sources.)
I don
Andrea,
I think you are reading too much into the word "filmmaker" - this is just
the term that the JSC chose to use to describe the relationship of a
person/family/corporate body as the sole creator of a film. A person who
makes a YouTube video entirely themself, with no other collaborators,
24 matches
Mail list logo
