Christopher, thanks for the help. It does make sense to still add original author's name if the name is part of the title even when he/she isn't listed as the author for the current edition. I wonder whether it should be treated as a cataloger's judgment call or it should be mentioned in some PCC document.
In addition, what is the appropriate relationship designator should we use under such a case? Will "author" still be appropriate?
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CHRISTOPHER WALKER
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 6:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Person name in the title but not an author, should 700 needed?
A tracing for Todd would be optional under the new code, so the bibliographic copy you found is not wrong.
I would consider the tracing required, under Ranganathan's Second Law, because it is not difficult to imagine a patron (you know,- users,- the people we work for) who is familiar with the work & will search for it by his name.
That user gets hits only from old editions, from the search using Todd's authorized access point.
Do we want them not to discover newer editions?
The publisher tacitly expects this search, or they would drop Todd from the title.
I would not pursue the tracing after "Todd" is dropped from the title, in future editions.
Strict constructionists floundering for an excuse under RDA to add a tracing for Todd might want to consider that some vestigial part of the text is surely still the work of Todd, as a Contributor. Otherwise it wouldn't be a 7th, and then an 8th, edition.
Christopher H. Walker
Serials Cataloging Librarian
Penn State's representative to the CONSER Operations Committee Member at Large, ALCTS CRS Executive Committee 2013/2016
126 Paterno Library
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802-1812
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yan Liao" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 5:02:35 PM
Subject: [PCCLIST] Person name in the title but not an author, should 700 needed?
We are cataloging one book "Todd & Wilson's text book on trusts" (11th ed.). Author is Sarah Wilson. But the original version was written by Paul Todd and published in 1991, the title was "Textbook on trusts". Starting from the 6th edition in , Sarah Wilson join the writing as a co-author in 2003. In 2005, when the 7th edition published, the title changed to "Todd & Wilson's text book on trusts" and only Sarah Wilson is listed in the title page. In the DLC records for 7th edition (OCLC: 58563014) and 8th edition (OCLC: 76935614), there is a name/title entry listed for Todd, Paul and previous edition. Starting from 2009, DLC records for 9th (OCLC: 277068200), and 10th edition (OCLC: 679931179), only Sarah Wilson is listed as the author. No 700 for Todd.
My question is whether Todd should still be listed as additional author considering his name is still in the title (But his name isn't listed on the title page or anywhere in the book)? If not, should 775 needed to link to the Todd's original work? (NOTE: this is the first RDA record among various edition. 7th and 8th edition has 700 name/title field for the previous edition based on the AACR2 rules, not 775.)