[RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

Hi all, I have questions about the correct use of the relationship designators, "issuing body" and "author," especially for corporate bodies. If a corporate body is considered the creator of a work (per RDA 19.2.1.1.1) and is recorded in the 110 of a bibliographic record, would you use the rel

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

700 1_ $i Contains (work): $a Estes, David. $t Anna's story. should be 700 12 $i Contains (work): $a Estes, David. $t Anna's story. The PCC recommended guidelines for use of relationship designators (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/PCC%20RDA%20guidelines/Relat-Desig-Guidelines.docx) say to inc

Re: [RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

In answer to the first question, "author" is probably the most likely designator to use if the corporate body is a creator, but many other relationship designators in the appendix I for creators could also be used for corporate bodies. An issuing body may not be the publisher. Many journals ar

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

> In this case the second indicator value 2 tells you that the thing in that field is > contained within the resource described, but the coding alone can't tell you > whether it is a work or an expression, so the relationship designator allows us to > be more specific. You can tell whether it is a

Re: [RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

I forgot to mention in my original email that we catalog numerous state government publications that are published?/issued? by state agencies and not commercial publishers. I lean towards using issuing body for these types of publications but wasn't sure if my leaning was in the right direction

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

However, in PCC practice the language element is not used in the access point for an expression in the original language. Consequently, the access point for a work and its original language expression may be identical. Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

Does that mean it contains both a work and an expression? On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: > However, in PCC practice the language element is not used in the access > point for an expression in the original language. Consequently, the access > point for a work and its or

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

I do think that I am right. It should mean that it contains an expression, although the heading would not have an element for the original language. Sorry about that :) On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Joan Wang wrote: > Does that mean it contains both a work and an expression? > > > > On Fri, Au

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

No. It is possible if we use the same heading to represent a work and its expression (for a compilation). Is that right? On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Joan Wang wrote: > I do think that I am right. It should mean that it contains an expression, > although the heading would not have an element

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

So better to put two identical headings, and respectively $i Contains (work) and Contains (expression) -:) On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Joan Wang wrote: > No. It is possible if we use the same heading to represent a work and its > expression (for a compilation). Is that right? > > > On Fri,

Re: [RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

I think this has come up before (either here or on AUTOCAT). I also catalog many government publications (technical reports) and am still fuzzy on what exactly constitutes a "publisher" or the act of "publishing." *Arthur W. Liu* Librarian Technician | Volpe Technical Library and Information Cen

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

I think if you use "Contains (expression)" that should be sufficient. If it contains the expression, by definition it also contains the work (since the expression expresses the work). Examples of situations where you're relating to the *work* might be some derivative relationships. The film "

Re: [RDA-L] 1st original RDA record - questions

I think that you are right. Kevin. For me, I would not put anything. I think that the second indicator 2 is enough -:) Thanks again. Joan Wang On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote: > I think if you use "Contains (expression)" that should be sufficient. > If it contains the e

[RDA-L] JSC web site: additional discussion papers

I've posted the following discussion papers for the November 2013 JSC meeting on the public web site (http://www.rda-jsc.org/workingnew.html): -- 6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/2 (Illustrative content and other augmentations: Discussion Paper -- 6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/3 (Compilations of Works: Discussion

[RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

With all these discussions and proposals about RDA being submitted, how dynamic is RDA? Is it still a code in process of becoming? How can we call it a cataloging code, when the code keeps changing, almost daily? -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.ed

[RDA-L] 300 #e

Is subfield e accompanying materials still allowed in RDA? I know we’re supposed to mention related works, but I’m not seeing an example of doing it in this manner in 24.4. It looks to me as if they all have to be handled as notes (24.4.3). If we are still allowed to record accompanying mater

Re: [RDA-L] 300 #e

See LC-PCC PS for 3.1.4 accompanying materials. The answer is Yes. On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Hinchcliff, Marilou wrote: > Is

Re: [RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

That is the thing bothering me. I cited RDA rules in my training materials. But once I go back, there are some changes. I cannot see when I can truly end my work :) On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Gene Fieg wrote: > With all these discussions and proposals about RDA being submitted, how > dyna

Re: [RDA-L] 300 #e

Thanks so much! My normal method when I can’t find something is to look it up in AACR2 and click on the link there to RDA. Obviously that doesn’t include the PC-PCC PSs. Marilou Hinchcliff From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC

Re: [RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

It might be hard to remember since it ended some time ago, but AACR2 was under continual revision after it was published. More-or-less annual updates were published up through 2005, and major revisions were issued in 1998 and 2002. If I understand correctly, RDA is following pretty much the sa

Re: [RDA-L] $i relators

Adam Schiff posted: >700 1_ $i Contains (work): $a Estes, David. $t Anna's story. > should be >700 12 $i Contains (work): $a Estes, David. $t Anna's story. I agree that the 2nd indicator "2" should be there. Our clients who have responded all reject the the $i. They fear it will mess up index

Re: [RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

Cathy Crum asked: >I have questions about the correct use of the relationship designators, "is= >suing body" and "author," especially for corporate bodies. We would limit the use of "author" with a corporate body, to resources entered under the corporate body, i.e., administrative resources about

Re: [RDA-L] Correct use of relationship designators for corportate bodies

Using "issuing body" in a 1XX field would not be a correct use of RDA, since issuing bodies are not defined as creators. The only designator that I see in I.2.2 that can for sure be used with a 1XX access point is "defendant", since RDA allows you to name legal works with a defendant's name.

Re: [RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

I so remember those loose-leaf update inserts that kept falling out! (Friday comment - pay it no mind) Stephen T. Early Cataloger Center for Research Libraries 6050 S. Kenwood Chicago, IL 60637 773-955-4545 x326 sea...@crl.edu CRL website: www.crl.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Res

Re: [RDA-L] $i relators

Just a question. After looking at MARC 21 site, I see the definition of subfield the subfield, but no examples On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 11:01 AM, J. McRee Elrod wrote: > Adam Schiff posted: > > >700 1_ $i Contains (work): $a Estes, David. $t Anna's story. > > should be > >700 12 $i Contains (w

Re: [RDA-L] 300 #e

Marilou Hinchcliff asked: >Is subfield e accompanying materials still allowed in RDA? Yes. 300 +$e is still with us for accompanying material. The LCPS for kits says to pick one component and treat all the other (equally important components) as accompanying material. Our clients would not

[RDA-L] Additional documents for JSC meeting

The following documents for the November 2013 JSC meeting have been posted on the public web site (http://www.rda-jsc.org/workingnew.html): -- 6JSC/ALA/25 (RDA Appendix K Revision and Expansion) -- 6JSC/ALA/26 (Colour Content (RDA 7.17)) -- 6JSC/ALA/Discussion/3 (Instructions for Recording Rela

Re: [RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

Thanks, Kevin, for the reminder about the switch to AACR2. I was wondering if there were similar growing pains. --- Lizzy Walker, MLS Metadata and Digital Initiatives Librarian http://works.bepress.com/lizzy_walker/ 316-978-5138 Wichita State University Libraries 1845 Fairmoun

Re: [RDA-L] RDA--How dynamic is it?

Kevin said: >It might be hard to remember since it ended some time ago, but AACR2 was un= >der continual revision after it was published. There were, however, far fewer changes due to not being able to understand what the text was saying. It was not long ago for me, but midway through my catal