On Tue, 23 Sep 1997, Karen M. Hsu <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Perhaps some would say this is not a big deal, leave the Contributor
> element there for anyone who sees fit to use it. However, the issue
> here,in my opinion, is similar to the Main Entry problem that is being
> heatedly debated in another Listserv (to revise AACR2). I have no
> intention of raising any unhappiness in any quarters, but it seems to me
> that this is the opportunity for DC to free itself of the main entry
> issue.
I'm not sure that the issue of DC creator/contributor IS similar to the
debates about main entry within AACR. AACR2 contains rules for
"determining the choice of access points (headings) under which a
bibliographic description ... is entered in a catalogue" and gives
"instructions on the choice of ONE of these access points as the
main entry heading" (AACR2 21.0A1 - emphasis added).
In DC the distinction between creator and contributor is less precisely
defined - a contributor is an individual or entity whose intellectual
contribution is considered to be "secondary" to those described as
creator. Interpretation and use of these elements may vary in different
implementations of DC.
DC creator/contributor is NOT defined with relation to AACR concepts of
main and added entry. In addition, DC creator is repeatable while AACR
main entry is not - these, presumably, are the reasons why the DC/USMARC
crosswalk mapped DC creator to USMARC 7XX and not 1XX.
Michael Day
----------------------------------------------------------
Research Officer, UKOLN, The UK Office for Library and
Information Networking, University of Bath, Bath BA2 7AY.
Phone: +44 (0)1225 323923 Fax: +44 (0)1225 826838
----------------------------------------------------------
|