 |
 |
RDA 19.2.1.1.1 says that a conference is considered to be the creator of a work that reports the collective activity of that conference. RDA 6.27.1.2 then says that the name of the conference is used as the
first part of the authorized access point. Thus the name of the conference would go into MARC field 110/111. As for relationship designators, they would have to come from RDA I.2.1, and currently there are no terms in that list that are appropriate. It
would be best to omit a relationship designator instead of applying one that is incorrect. (Note that "sponsoring body" and "issuing body" are in RDA I.2.2, and are not appropriate for use with creators.) I'm not sure if anyone has proposed a new relationship
designator for conferences considered to be creators, but I think it would be a good idea!
Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
(847) 491-2939
Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Rebecca Uhl
Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 11:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] relationship designator for conference
According to the PCC guidelines for relationship designators, we are supposed to be adding a relationship designator to access points for creators, and are strongly encouraged
to do so for all access points. But what about conferences? None of the examples in the guidelines are for conferences, just people. Are conferences “creators”?
We haven’t seen many relationship designators for conferences at all, whether they are in a 111 or 711. In an OCLC search of recent (2012-2013) RDA records with conference
headings, I found NLM is consistently using the relationship designator, but LC and other PCC libraries are (apparently) not doing so. Some of these records were created in July 2013, after the guidelines were released, so should we use them for conferences
or not? If we do, what do we call them? Author? Sponsoring body? Issuing body?
Your insights will be greatly appreciated!
Becky