Print

Print


RDA 6.2.2.10.2 gives us leeway to select "an appropriate specific collective title." If the assembled Berengo-Gardin works are all photographs, then using "$t Photographs. $k Selections" seems specific and appropriate.�

I could see including the $e in a relationship statement to express the relationship between Berengo-Gardin and the work per RDA 18.5; but that's different. The name that appears in the authorized access point is just that--part of the work's access point, and not generally the preferred place to express the relationship.

Though there appear to be exceptions. The MARC21 Authority Format includes "$e defendant" in the name/title access point for a court case as an example of using $e (cf. Names and Terms--General Information/X00, $e).

Stephen


On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Wilson, Pete <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Honestly I don�t know�I am still a little boggled by the new �works/selections� approach to art. �I gather you are agreeing that the relationship designators should not be included in the work authorized access point, though?

Pete Wilson

Vanderbilt University

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 5:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] 700 name/title work entries that include relationship designators

Is "700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni. $t Photographs. $k Selections." an option?

Stephen

On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:07 PM, John Wright <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Yes, it seems that an error was made and this would best be presented as two separate 700 fields as follows:

700:1 : Berengo-Gardin, Gianni, $e photographer.

700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni. $t Works. $k Selections.

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wilson, Pete
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:29 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: 700 name/title work entries that include relationship designators

I�m curious about what seems a strange combination of name-title work AAP and relationship designators.

This is from LC�s record 2013-361481:

700:12: Berengo-Gardin, Gianni, $e photographer. $t Works. $k Selections.

Is the use of the relationship designator appropriate here?� It looks funny to me.

Philosophically it seems that we are using this field awkwardly for two purposes.� The relationship designator expresses the relationship of Berengo-Gardin to the manifestation.� The field as a whole, minus the relationship designator, records a work contained in the manifestation.�

Would it be better to use two separate fields?� Or is the relationship designator simply unnecessary?

In this case, by the way, the book is entered under title.� It is an exhibition catalog.� The only other 7xx field is for the �editor of compilation.�

Would love to hear what you think.� Thanks!

Pete Wilson

Vanderbilt University



--

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Technical Services, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

160 Wilson Library

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

Fx:�612-625-3428




--
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