Print

Print


As Karen notes, Publisher is not typically added as an authorized
heading in AACR2 cataloging, but it can be. There are authorities for
publisher names, and there is a MARC relator term/code (Publisher/pbl)
for this relationship, also authorized for RDA. The  Bibframe model
will need to accommodate this sort of thing--relationships that are
enabled for specialized use, not just the ones that are most common.
And it will inevitably need to accommodate relationships between
established entities and each kind of bibliographic object, however
those ultimately get sorted out and named.

Current MARC authorities are themselves a poor model for FRBR Work and
Expression entities in that MARC cannot express properties like
subject which FRBR says belong to these entities. I don't see any
effort in the early Bibframe model to argue for the appropriateness of
either the current authority data structure or the term "authorities,"
which is fine. Both currently reflect a focus on "authorized" heading
forms which promises to become a lesser component of the identified
entity representations we're moving toward with RDA. If "authority"
was used in the model document to give catalogers something familiar
to grab onto, maybe that wasn't such a good idea. Better to explain
more clearly where we've been and where we're going.

The Bibframe model's eliding of  FRBR works and expressions is
concerning, but I do welcome the comment that Bibframe expects to
distinguish types of works. This acknowledgment that Works (and by
implication Expressions) need to be sorted into types could help us
label work descriptions in a way that would let us say both that
Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet is a work and that a resource which
aggregates Romeo and Juliet with an introduction, a critical essay, a
glossary, etc., is also a work, but an aggregate work (as FRBR 3.3
states), without sacrificing the ability to distinguish these two
types of work. They represent different levels of abstraction and
users searching for works should be able to specify which they
want--the thirty-some dramatic works Shakespeare wrote, or the
thousands of aggregate works centered on those thirty-some plays.

Stephen

On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm surprised that no one has mentioned this yet, but the authority examples
> used in the diagrams in the document do not ring true for me, and I admit
> that they are presenting a stumbling block in terms of my own mental image
> of bibframe.
>
> Place of publication and publisher are not authority controlled. These are
> transcribed elements. "Publisher" in particular is problematic because what
> is transcribed from the title page is often the name of an imprint ("Penguin
> Classics") not the identity of a corporation or institution. (And with all
> of the buyouts of publishers, I think most of us would be hard-pressed to
> develop a coherent "who's who" in that area.) Physical format is a
> controlled vocabulary, but those are not generally called "authorities."
> Almost all authority controlled elements in RDA have their relationships to
> either Work or Expression (which I believe means BIBFRAME Work). There are
> some authority controlled relationships to manifestations (I keep a cheat
> sheet here [1]), but they tend to be rather specialized, relating to rare
> book cataloging or materials like braille.
>
> [Note: There is a Publisher role listed in RDA related to Manifestation, but
> I don't know when it is used. I'm suspecting rare books again, but hope
> someone more knowledgeable on the list can respond.]
>
> There will be authority controlled entities with relationships to item (same
> cheat sheet), again for specialized materials.
>
> In current data, "Work" and "Expression" are sometimes represented in an
> authority record. Classical music works seem to always get such an authority
> entry. I'm not at all clear on what happens to these as we move into RDA,
> since the FRBR:Work entity carries the data elements that are now in the
> authority record (plus others), and the anticipated identifier for the
> FRBR:Work entity would perform the identification function of the current
> authoritative heading.
>
> I hope and expect that library data will expand its use of identified
> entities in the future. I would very much like to see at least a controlled
> list for place of publication (because I can think of uses for that). This
> would have to exist along with the transcribed place information, since that
> has a different purpose.
>
> kc
> p.s. Catalogers on the list: please feel free to correct any mis-statements
> here about RDA!
>
> [1] http://kcoyle.net/rda/roles.txt
>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet



-- 
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Technical Services, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428