Gary mentioned that $e is defined in the authorities format but we don't use it .... in authority records, that is.
Paul Weiss mentioned that "roles rock" in response to Karen's message about the role of role in bib records.
Controlling the roles via name authority records does not seem the way that any ILS I know is constructed. You might mention the known roles that a person or body has performed and you probably would control the terminology that you used to indicate role, but you're unlikely to try to control roles via the same personal- or corporate-name authority record that you control the personal or corporate name.
Sherman Clarke
NYU Libraries & VRA rep to MARBI (role is also being discussed in conjunction with VRA Core as it is with many metadata standards and schema)
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Strawn <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, March 22, 2004 1:44 pm
Subject: Re: question about authorities
> At 02:00 PM 3/15/2004, you wrote:
> >Yes, an authority 100 is used to verify bibliographic 100, 600, 700,
> >800, and the former 400. The subfields are the same except $e
> and $4,
> >which are not in authority records, since they denote the
> relation of
> >the person to the work.
>
> $e is defined in the authorities format; we just don't use it.
>
> And just for completeness: 151 $a verifies bib X10 and X11 $a when the
> first indicator is 1.
>
>
> Gary L. Strawn, Authorities Librarian, etc.
> Northwestern University, 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston IL 60208-2300
> e-mail: [log in to unmask] voice: 847/491-2788 fax:
> 847/491-8306
> Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.
>
|