 |
 |
I agree: "My gut feeling is that unless you've used library cataloging rules to create the original bibliographic data, the odds of being able to recreate a MARC field from any non-MARC metadata is very low. " Suzanne C. Pilsk ***NEW PHONE NUMBER*** 202-633-1646 Cataloging Services (Unit number 202-633-1668) Smithsonian Institution Libraries PO Box 37012 Natural History Building, Room 30- MRC 0154 Washington, DC 20013-7012 [log in to unmask] >>> [log in to unmask] 09/07/04 02:06PM >>> On Tue, 2004-09-07 at 10:22, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > > One problem is that it then introduces an inconsistency between > mods:name and mods:titleInfo. But it's not an inconsistency when using the library cataloging rules, which allow multiple forms of a title in a bibliographic record, but only one form of each author's name. What I think you're saying is that you want to apply a different set of rules for author. In this case, MODS clearly has a bias toward the library rules (which it inherits from MARC). Under those rules it isn't necessary to distinguish between multiple authors and multiple forms of an author's name (except with the transliteration case). If one allows more than one titleInfo > element, I see no logical reason why not to allow more than one name. > Right. It's not a question of logic. It's a question of how far MODS should deviate from the MARC record. This is a question that has puzzled me for a while and not only do I not have an answer, I'm not sure what criteria one would use to come up with an answer. I believe that some people expect to be able to go from MARC to MODS and MODS to MARC. In that case, adding multiple forms of an author's name complicates the MODS to MARC unless there is specific coding that would identify what librarians call the "authoritative name." In fact, the entire issue of MODS to MARC hinges on the content of the fields and the cataloging rules that were used to create the original metadata. My gut feeling is that unless you've used library cataloging rules to create the original bibliographic data, the odds of being able to recreate a MARC field from any non-MARC metadata is very low. If we could abandon all hope of a MODS to MARC mapping, then the MODS record could probably gain a lot of flexibility. Even so, I would want to clearly mark parallel transliterated/vernacular names as a special case (as opposed to two forms of the author's name, like T.C. Boyle and T. Coraghessan Boyle). -- ------------------------------------- Karen Coyle Digital Library Specialist http://www.kcoyle.net Ph: 510-540-7596 Fax: 510-848-3913 --------------------------------------