Discussion paper from DNB: Mixture of work level and manifestation level in RDA (Collective Title and Titles of Individual Contents), Optional Additions

Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Discussion paper from DNB: Mixture of work level and manifestation level in RDA (Collective Title and Titles of Individual Contents), Optional Additions

  1. John Myers says:

    I have written across the top, “Excellent analysis. Good questions.” I noted that on page 3, under the examples for the second option, that while they do refer to the included works, the compilation actually contains the German language expressions of those works. To the questions, a) YES; b, part 2) rather than one or the other, possibly use both — in MARC speak a 700 author/title and a 740 title as it appears on the manifestation?

  2. Kathy Glennan says:

    I agree with the Germans that there’s a problem here; however, I’m not sure I agree with either of the options they suggest.

    It seems to me that based on the circumstances, a cataloger might want to record the related work, expression, or manifestation (and in some cases, maybe even the item). I don’t think that Chapter 2 is the right place to go into these options. However, a rewording of each of the options in to use whatever WEMI relationship is desired, following the instructions in 24.4 might solve that problem.


  3. Robert L. Maxwell says:

    I don’t disagree that there’s a problem, but I think it stems from attempting to write RDA for the MARC environment. I think the problems brought up in the paper are problems with recording this information in a bibliographic record, which isn’t really a description of any particular FRBR/RDA entity. When we record this sort of thing in authority records, which in my opinion are in fact quite close to entity descriptions, then the problem of how to word RDA might become clearer. I created a couple of work and expression authority records for aggregates today that recorded these relationships, and that might be useful to conisder:

    no2014110015 Asimov, Isaac, 1920-1992. Martian way and other stories
    no2014110099 Asimov, Isaac, 1920-1992. Martian way and other stories. Spanish

    Bob, SAC

  4. Kathy Glennan says:

    Comments from the Task Force to Investigate the Instructions for Recording Relationships in RDA

    The TF is currently working on this issue and expects to develop a proposal next year. Thus, DNB does not need to follow up on their discussion paper, as ALA is taking responsibility for this.

    The TF discussion of this paper raised the following points:

    a) is talking about recording a relationship between the resource and its parts.

    b) This relationship is not necessarily to a related work (as the references currently in imply), but might also be to a related expression or even a related manifestation. While treating the relationship at the manifestation level might be the most fruitful, this is not the only valid approach.

    c) RDA does treat the recording of such relationships in chapters 24-28; references from other chapters should probably be to chapter 24.

    d) The TF doesn’t feel that either of DNB options work well and wonders if the instruction in question really needs to exist at all (since the relevant instructions are in Chapters 24-28).

    e) If something is needed in, the TF would prefer the statements referring to 25.1 to be replaced with:

    Record the titles of the individual contents as related titles (see 24.4 RDA)
    Record the collective title for the larger resource as a related title (see 24.4 RDA)

  5. Adolfo Tarango says:

    Reading this paper my understanding the problem identified is the perceived need to add title access for the individual titles presented in a form that is not the AAP for that work. Building on Bob’s examples for the collected title, in a appropriately structure ILS with good authority control references, would not title access via these title variants be handled by making the appropriate 4XX entries to the authority record of the individual works?

Leave a Reply