LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  May 2015

BIBFRAME May 2015

Subject:

Re: Series in BIBFRAME

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 27 May 2015 13:16:49 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (113 lines)

On 5/26/15 7:14 PM, Adam L. Schiff wrote:
> On Tue, 26 May 2015, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
>>> 4)  The ISSN of a series is an identifier of the series, not an 
>>> identifier of a manifestation in which the ISSN appears. 0277-786X 
>>> is the ISSN of the SPIE proceedings series:  it does not identify 
>>> volume 2357 of the series.
>> Yes, and it makes sense that the information about the series would 
>> *not* be present in the description of the manifestation, but in the 
>> description of the series. In past cataloging practice, this 
>> information was included in the record for the manifestation because 
>> linking between entities was not possible (e.g. in the card catalog), 
>> and the series data was there for a person with a brain to follow up on.
>>
>> Note that the ISSN would rarely be in a transcribed series statement, 
>> if one is included in the description of the manifestation. Any 
>> transcribed information is about the manifestation, and should not be 
>> considered linking information. (e.g. 490 vs. 830) (Transcribed data 
>> is text that is intended to be displayed to the human reader.)
>
> Karen,
>
> ISSN is always recorded in the series statement (490 $x) when it is 
> present on a manifestation.  If the ISSN on the manifestation is 
> incorrect or inappropriate, it is still transcribed as found. This is 
> not a change from AACR2 practice.
>
> RDA 2.12.8.3  Recording the ISSN of a Series
> Transcribe the ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) of a series 
> as it appears on the source of information.
>
> RDA 2.12.16.3  Recording the ISSN of a Subseries
> Transcribe the ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) of a 
> subseries as it appears on the source of information.
>
> ISSN is not a core element in RDA manifestation descriptions, but it 
> is a core element for the PCC.

Adam, I think you miss my point. My point is that series information 
belongs in the series description linked to the manifestation or 
instance. It is a bibliographic relationship.  I think you are looking 
at the literal (and perhaps pedantic) rules of the cataloging code 
rather than thinking about functionality. For example, because 
transcription isn't linking data (precisely because it is text), then 
there is no need for a separate subfield $x for this data in a statement 
carrying transcribed text. If you want to indicate to other experts that 
the piece as a mistaken ISSN, surely there is a better place for that 
than in a field destined for a user display.

I also think there is a mis-conception that separate MARC subfields make 
the data machine-actionable. That is absolutely not the case. "$d c1970" 
or "$d 2015" isn't typed data, it's text. Assuming you have a standard 
formatted date elsewhere in your data, what is gained by this subfield? 
A lot of the inter-field distinctions made in MARC have no real 
functionality that I can see, and we should re-think that aspect of our 
bibliographic description. As Thomas Berger said in an other thread:

> I mean, there is not really much difference between
>
> 245 $a Hamlet, prince of Denmark
> 245 $a Hamlet. Prince of Denmark
> or
> 245 $a Hamlet :$b Prince of Denmark

Unless you can point to a convincing functional reason for the $b, it's 
just overhead with no value.

Sorry, but I really see a lot of "rote-ness" in the cataloging rules, 
and very little that links them to catalog functionality. And, my 
{$deity}, Lubetzky complained about this very thing in 1946, and we 
still haven't created functional cataloging rules.

kc
>
>
> It's important not to confuse what's recorded as manifestation 
> information (series statement elements specified in chapter 2 of RDA 
> and recorded in 490 in MARC) and whole-part work relationships that 
> are recorded as authorized series access points in MARC 8XX and are 
> covered by other chapters in RDA (i.e., chapter 6 for a series as a 
> work, including ISSN as a work identifier, and chapters 24-26 for 
> relationships, including 24.6 for numbering of part).   Note that 
> Numbering within Series (2.12.9) is NOT the same element as Numbering 
> of Part (24.6).  One is a manifestation attribute, the other is used 
> as the name of the part of a work when a relationship is being 
> recorded for that part.  The difficultly with all this is that in many 
> cases, a particular work was only published once, will only ever be 
> published once, so if the one and only manifestation of that work 
> happened to be in a series, it does make sense to treat the work as 
> being in a particular series (i.e., a work to work whole-part 
> relationship). But as Joe Kiegel demonstrated with his Hamlet example, 
> as soon as different manifestations of an expression of a work appear 
> in different series, the relationship really isn't work to work 
> anymore, it's manifestation to work.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Adam L. Schiff
> Principal Cataloger
> University of Washington Libraries
> Box 352900
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> (206) 543-8409
> (206) 685-8782 fax
> [log in to unmask]
> http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

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

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
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 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
July 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
October 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
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager