I was already thinking about some identifier issues in the RDA
elements (which I will post about once I get a clearer picture)... but
I did look up the identifier rules for RDA and here's some text from
2.15.1.1:
*****
An identifier for the manifestation is an alphanumeric string
associated with a manifestation that serves to differentiate that
manifestation from other manifestations.
Identifiers for manifestations include identifiers registered applying
internationally recognized schemes (e.g., ISBN, ISSN, URN), as well as
other identifiers assigned by publishers, distributors, government
publications agencies, document clearinghouses, archives, etc.,
following internally devised schemes.ifiers include identifiers
registered in accordance with internationally recognized schemes
(e.g., ISBN, ISSN, URN), as well as other identifiers assigned by
publishers, distributors, government publications agencies, document
clearinghouses, archives, etc., following internally devised schemes.
*****
It's all quite logical when you think about it, but to re-state: RDA
records identifiers that have been assigned to the four FRBR levels.
It does not designate internal identifiers for instances of the
entities in the bibliographic record. So the RDA element "Identifier
of the manifestation" is a repeatable element that can carry any
identifiers that have been assigned to that manifestation. Also, RDA
only speaks about identifiers for the resource, not for metadata
(like LCCNs or OCLC numbers). If/when we assign a place for these in a
metadata record based on RDA, I assume they will be appropriately
placed in an administrative area of the metadata record, referring to
related metadata records, provenance for the metadata record, etc.
kc
--
-- ---
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
|