On Wed, 24 Sep 1997, Jon Knight wrote:
>
> > Since both would be indexed by the same Name Index, and could be
> > displayed together to the public. There doesn't seem a point to enter
> > them into different elements. Interestingly enough, in the 4/7/97
> > DC/MARC crosswolk, both the Creator and Contributor elements are mapped
> > into the same MARC fields 7xx.
>
> I think there are likely to be plenty of occasions when you want to search
> for creators of works and ignore other contributors (when doing my PhD
> research I was interested in stuff _written_ by Jon Crowcroft but not that
> he'd edited, scanned, illustrated, etc, etc). Creator/Contributor seems
> to delinate that nicely. Why the DC/MARC crosswalk mapped both onto the
> same MARC fields is something someone more up on MARC will have to answer;
> I would have thought that the creator would go to 100/110 myself. The
> again I studied discrete mathematics, programming and logic as an
> undergrad and not cat'n'class! :-)
>
> Tatty bye,
>
> Jim'll
When mapped to MARC (field 720), the creator is distinguished from the
contributor by the existence of $e author ($e is Relator term). We are
using the term author in the generic sense, i.e. creator. So, if converted
from DC to MARC, generate $e author if the element is Creator.
The reason for this is that 720 is defined as Uncontrolled Name, which
means that the field is not controlled by an authority file and we will
not distinguish a personal name from a corporate name. If there is a
qualifier type="personal" or "corporate", then it maps to 700 or 710.
Right now there is no corresponding "main entry" field (1XX fields) that
is uncontrolled and doesn't differentiate between types of corporate name.
Maybe we want to look at defining a 120 for this in MARC. However, at
the time we defined the 720 (the impetus was for Dublin Core) we figured
that if it wasn't important enough to distinguish type of name, perhaps it
wasn't important enough to assess main responsibility for the item either.
The rules for determining main entry (and hence use of 1XX fields) are
complex because there are often not clear-cut cases. We are willing to
adjust the mapping if there are compelling reasons to do so. What is
important is to have a straightforward mapping that will work for the
minimalist (unqualified) approach, with alternatives for the structuralist
approach.
Rebecca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^ Rebecca S. Guenther ^^
^^ Senior MARC Standards Specialist ^^
^^ Network Development and MARC Standards Office ^^
^^ Library of Congress ^^
^^ Washington, DC 20540-4020 ^^
^^ (202) 707-5092 (voice) (202) 707-0115 (FAX) ^^
^^ [log in to unmask] ^^
^^ ^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|