Print

Print


Are these groupings of Cicero's works definitively established by
tradition, or are there cases where a work might be contained in both
groups, or where its inclusion in a group would be disputed? The Bible's
Old Testament and New Testament are less definitively defined as groups in
RDA than they were under AACR2. Is something similar the case for these
groupings of Cicero's works?

Stephen

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:59 PM, Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Cicero’s works are traditionally so grouped. The NARs could be improved by
> clarifying which works are included in each group (listing them in a
> 677/678 and/or recording 500 “container of (work)” relationships), but in
> my opinion they are fine in RDA.
>
>
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> Robert L. Maxwell
> Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
> 6728 Harold B. Lee Library
> Brigham Young University
> Provo, UT 84602
> (801)422-5568 <(801)%20422-5568>
>
>
>
> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]
> gov] *On Behalf Of *Gene Fieg
> *Sent:* Monday, April 3, 2017 5:05 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Classical works : Cicero
>
>
>
> I am/was working on AAPs for Cicero's works.  For some I had created a
> larger expression, Works. Sellections or Essays. Selections.
>
> But now I see AACR2 AAPs:
>
> Cicero. Philosophical works
>
> Cicero. Rhetorical works
>
> These have not been reviewed; dont see a 667 field.  Are these still valid
> in RDA?  Or they be more properly brought into line with RDA.
>
>
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
> Gene Fieg
>



-- 
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242