LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for MARC Archives


MARC Archives

MARC Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MARC Home

MARC Home

MARC  June 2003

MARC June 2003

Subject:

Re: RLG staff comments on MARBI 2003 Annual materials

From:

Joe Zeeman <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

MARC <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 17 Jun 2003 10:34:35 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (126 lines)

I believe that Mr Weiss has misunderstood the thrust of several of RLG's
comments. Our concern has not been with uniform title authorities as they
have developed to serve the needs of traditional cataloging, but with the
piecemeal and uncoordinated addition of elements to the authority record to
allow it to serve as a carrier of FRBR-related work and expression
information.  As the ultimate source of some of these comments I would like
to expand on them.

Of course we perfectly well aware that  work and, to some extent,
expression uniform  titles have been included in authority records since
the beginning.  This has been warranted by cataloging rules and practices
pretty well "since time immemorial".  However, the purpose of constructing
authority records for work uniform titles has almost entirely been to serve
a collocation function in arranging catalog entries.  We do not believe
that authority records have heretofore generally been seen as a repository
for the kind of authoritative descriptive and other information about works
and expressions in themselves that the FRBR analysis implies.

We are of the view that the current proposal, while not in itself
objectionable, opens the door to requests to include additional
work-related information in the authority record -- information whose aim
is not to improve the collocating function of uniform titles, but to act as
the authoritative repository of information about the work and the
expression.  The inclusion of some of this information would be problematic
and also highly contentious.  To give an off-the-wall example, subject
access points are quite clearly a property of the work entity in the FRBR
analysis and not of the manifestation.  In a coherent model of
bibliographic information, therefore, it would make sense to associate
subject access points with the work record rather than with the
manifestation record.  If the authority is going to serve as the work
record, then it follows that the authority format should be expanded to
enable subject access points to be associated with a uniform title.  This
would, of course, entail major changes to the structure of the authority
record and would be highly disruptive.  But it is a logical consequence of
the line of thinking implicit in the proposal.

Our view is that the time is opportune to undertake the analysis required
to determine whether the authority can and should serve as the work and/or
expression record and what changes to the authority are required if it is
determined that it should.  The current proposal posits that the authority
record is the right and proper place for work information.  We contend that
the logical consequences of this assumption have not yet been adequately
examined and verified.

Our issue with the uniform title for the Hebrew edition of Harry Potter is
similar.  Of course the uniform title in the example will normally be
adequate to allow a coherent collocation of entries in a catalog.  And as
such it is perfectly valid in a "traditional" uniform title authority
record.  If, however, the authority is intended to serve as a FRBR
expression record, this uniform title is not sufficient.  The uniform title
as given does NOT identify a particular expression.  There can (will) be
multiple translations of Harry Potter into Hebrew, each one of which is, by
definition, a different expression.  In order to identify the expression
fully, additional qualifiers will be needed for the expression title, the
most obvious one being the translator's name.  Thus our suggestion that in
an expression record, subfield s would normally be present and should thus
be shown in the example.

I wish to stress that RLG has been, and remains, a strong supporter of the
FRBR approach to modelling bibliographic data.  The point we wished to make
is that, to ensure the continuing utility and coherence of the authority
system, the use of authority records to carry FRBR information needs to be
studied more fully and carefully than the current proposal suggests has
been done.

Johan Zeeman
Senior Analyst
RLG




                      "Paul J. Weiss"
                      <[log in to unmask]>        To:       [log in to unmask]
                      Sent by: MARC            cc:
                      <[log in to unmask]>           Subject:  Re: RLG staff comments on MARBI 2003 Annual materials


                      06/13/2003 07:49
                      AM
                      Please respond to
                      MARC






Although I agree with many of the RLG comments, I am concerned that a
couple of them show a lack of understanding of cataloging rules and
practices.

>Proposal 2003-04
>----------------
>RLG staff would again like to state this change broadens the scope
>of a MARC21 authority record by including FRBR work level
>information (even if only a standard number for a work). This opens
>the door to inclusion of more FRBR work level information.
>Broadening the scope of authority records to "work" authority
>records really does require a more detailed analysis of
>requirements, and RLG staff hope that MARBI recognizes that.

Authority records for uniform titles have encompassed both works and
expressions since the beginning. For example, the heading "Bible. N.T.
Acts" identifies a work, not an expression.

>In the example for the Hebrew edition of Harry Potter and the
>Chamber of Secrets, the heading is missing $s for
>version/edition/translator information. It seems likely that a
>cataloger would include that in the heading, so the MARC 21 format
>example should reflect that.

Catalogers should generally _not_ be making this sort of addition to  this
type of uniform title heading.

Paul

_______________________________________
Paul J. Weiss
Head, Monographs Cataloging Division
Catalog Department
UCSD Libraries
858-534-3537
[log in to unmask]
_______________________________________

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager