Thank you, Patrick and Christopher. I will keep these criteria in mind when applying the terms.
Jasmin
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lavey, Patrick
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 1:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] "Publisher" as relationship designator--correct or not?
Hi, Jasmin:
It would be nice if RDA provided more guidance on this. Generally, I use "publisher" only when it is a commercial publisher who has very little or nothing at all to do with content. I use "issuing body" when it is a publisher who is plainly not simply a commercial publisher and who also provides significant editorial input (they hire the editors who revise each edition, the editors are members of their staff and act as authors as well as editors). I use it for corporate bodies mentioned where there is evidence that they have caused the issuance in some way and are not simply sponsoring the publication.
So, I believe there is a difference. I use "publisher" sparingly. It is a legitimate relationship designator. We are asked not to propose RDA elements such as publisher for addition to the list of relator terms.
Other thoughts on this?
Patrick
Patrick Lavey
Senior Cataloging Librarian
Hugh and Hazel Darling Law Library
UCLA School of Law
385 Charles E. Young Drive East
Los Angeles, CA 90095
(310) 794-5390
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shinohara, Jasmin
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 10:04 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] "Publisher" as relationship designator--correct or not?
Is there a practical difference between using the relator term "Issuing body" (= "A person, family, or corporate body issuing a work, such as an official organ of the body") and "Publisher" ("A person, family, or corporate body responsible for publishing, releasing, or issuing a resource")?
Jasmin
---
Jasmin Shinohara
Hebraica Cataloging Librarian
University of Pennsylvania
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
3420 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
T. 215-746-6397
F. 215-573-9610
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ehlert, Mark K.
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 11:44 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] "Publisher" as relationship designator--correct or not?
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] "Publisher" as relationship designator--correct or not?
>
> Those high level designators (e.g. Creator, Contributor, Publisher,
> Distributor) are allowed as per Guideline 4 (page 6) of the PCC
> Training Manual for Applying Relationships Designators in Biographical
> Records
Adding a little more... The RDA elements Netanel mentions, which come from chapters 19-22, are applied as designators due to MARC having no other means to reflect that specific relationship in another way. For instance, there's no MARC tag for "publisher" that holds an access point for the publisher. So we use a generic 700, 710, or 711 (added name entry) along with a $e or $j.
--
Mark K. Ehlert O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library
Cataloging and Metadata University of St. Thomas
Librarian 2115 Summit Avenue
Phone: 651-962-5488 St. Paul, MN 55105
<http://www.stthomas.edu/libraries/>
"Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by the swift course of time"--Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen of Verona," Act I, Scene iii
|