It is possible that I am using the term "label" in a different sense
than you are expecting. What I am intending to convey is that the
name of the publisher is presented as a text string on the resource
being described and that this text string is included ("transcribed")
as identifying information in the description of that resource. This
is different from the name of the publisher as an identifying
attribute of the publisher as an entity (although the same text
string may be involved).
In our RDA discussions we have been using the term "label" to refer
to the text strings (title, statement of responsibility, edition,
etc.) that are included (printed) as identifying information on a
bibliographic resource. The transcription of these "labels" in
appropriate data elements is one of the principal tasks involved in
creating the description of a resource.
I'm not clear whether this makes the description monolithic -- or
that we ought in fact to be getting away from doing that. Perhaps you
could expand a bit on that point.
John
At 10:23 AM 8/4/2007, Karen Coyle wrote:
>John,
>
>I'm having trouble with this publisher-as-label thing because I
>don't understand what it's labeling. I could see the publisher name
>as being a label for the entity that published the book, but I don't
>understand the publisher label in relation to the item being
>described. Unless, of course, the entire bibliographic description
>is being considered a label for the item being described, but then
>that makes the description monolithic, which I think is exactly what
>we're trying to get away from.
|