It makes little sense to me that the proceedings of a conference,
and its program (when they are separate publications)
might have different relationship designators.
What user task is served by making a distinction?
Christopher H. Walker
Serials Cataloging Librarian
Penn State's representative to the CONSER Operations Committee
Member at Large, ALCTS CRS Executive Committee 2013/2016
126 Paterno Library
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802-1812
(814) 865-4212
[log in to unmask]
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2013 2:36:21 PM
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] relationship designator for conference
To me the creative action of a conference is precisely in compiling (aggregating, bringing together) content created by the participants to make an aggregated work/expression. Initiating, inspiring, motivating the content presented--I don't see those as warranting "creator" status. They'd belong with the "association" relationships listed in I.2.2.
Stephen
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Layne, Sara < [log in to unmask] > wrote:
Yes, but ... I don't think 'compiler' captures what is really most important about the relationship of the conference to these works/expressions, which is that the conference is responsible for initiating the *creation* of the data that is then being compiled.
Sara Shatford Layne
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [ [log in to unmask] ] on behalf of Stephen Hearn [ [log in to unmask] ]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 9:18 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] relationship designator for conference
"Compiler" is defined in Appendix I.2.1 as "A person, family, or corporate body responsible for creating a new work (e.g., a bibliography, a directory) by selecting, arranging, aggregating, and editing data, information, etc. For a compiler as a contributor, see editor of compilation."
If the conference event itself and the published proceedings and a video record of the event are all considered expressions of the content which the conference created as a work, it's not too much of a stretch to consider the conference as selecting, arranging, and aggregating the work's content. The person who whips the proceedings into shape for publication would be "editor of compilation" leaving credit for compiling the work to the conference itself.
Stephen
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 10:32 AM, Melanie Shaw < [log in to unmask] > wrote:
"Compiler of proceedings" would not work well with other publications authored by conferences, such as official programs, and abstracts of sessions, to name just a few I've had to deal with recently.
Melanie Shaw
Cataloger
Utah State University
Merrill-Cazier Library
Logan, Utah 84322
melanie.shaw
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Layne, Sara < [log in to unmask] > wrote:
Interesting suggestion, but ... "Compiler of proceedings" sounds (to me) like a description of an editor who assembled the papers from the conference into a publication, not a description of the corporate entity (the conference) that caused the papers to be generated in the first place.
Sara Shatford Layne
Recently Retired from the UCLA Library
________________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [ [log in to unmask] ] on behalf of Tarango, Adolfo [ [log in to unmask] ]
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 7:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] relationship designator for conference
Compiler of proceedings.
Adolfo
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto: [log in to unmask] ] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2013 12:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] relationship designator for conference
Some people are using "author" for conferences, but I agree that's not ideal. The PCC Guidelines allow us to use the element name, so one could use "creator". If we were to create a new designator specifically for conferences, what would you call it?
Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Kevin M Randall wrote:
> Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 17:11:54 +0000
> From: Kevin M Randall < [log in to unmask] >
> Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging < [log in to unmask] >
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: relationship designator for conference
>
> 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
> [log in to unmask] <mailto: [log in to unmask] >
> (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
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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