Mark Ehlert wrote:
> Slipping a designator in the access point itself--despite the legality of the
> $e under MARC--isn't justified by the instructions on building AAPs
> following RDA 6.27ff..
I think the justification is found in RDA 188.8.131.52, which says: "Record one or more appropriate terms from the list in appendix I with an identifier and/or authorized access point representing the person, family, or corporate body to indicate the nature of the relationship more specifically than is indicated by the defined scope of the relationship element itself." The LC-PCC PS for RDA 184.108.40.206 only mentions how to handle illustrators of resources for children, and gives no examples of MARC coding. While RDA proper has no examples, there are examples in the "Examples of RDA Records (JSC)" section on the Tools tab, and the format Anne Champagne wrote about seems to fit.
This is probably something that is going to work better in our post-MARC era.
Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
[log in to unmask]
Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!