 |
 |
Sorry, missed this earlier. I think that someone who 'edits' a bibliography is a 'compiler' (which is a creator-relator), not an editor at all. Best wishes, Bernadette ******************* Bernadette O'Reilly Catalogue Support Librarian 01865 2-77134 Bodleian Libraries, Osney One Building Osney Mead Oxford OX2 0EW. ******************* -----Original Message----- From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Welsh, Anne Sent: 24 October 2012 14:09 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 Hi Bernadette Yes, I agree. What I'm missing (and I keep looking for it, believe me), is a definition of what counts as creation and what doesn't where editing is concerned? Help! Obviously, someone who "edits" a bibliography is a creator. But beyond that, I'm not sure exactly what RDA is saying. I know what FRBR is saying, but I'm obviously failing to find the relevant bit of RDA. Anne On 24/10/2012 14:00, "Bernadette Mary O'Reilly" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >The idea that intellectual/artistic ideas are usually born in a single >person's head (and not in any specific content-type, language or >suchlike) is a fiction, but a fiction that FRBR relies heavily on in >order to offer a fairly simple model; so we probably need to go along >with this model and discount intellectual input, suggestions and >inspirations, from people such as editors unless they get a specific >credit, e.g. "based on an idea by". If we leave that as 'cataloguer's >judgment', cataloguers will have to become researchers and critics. > >Best wishes, >Bernadette > >******************* >Bernadette O'Reilly >Catalogue Support Librarian >01865 2-77134 >Bodleian Libraries, >Osney One Building >Osney Mead >Oxford OX2 0EW. >******************* > > >-----Original Message----- >From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anne >Welsh >Sent: 24 October 2012 13:42 >To: [log in to unmask] >Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 > >I think this is an interesting point. It can be difficult to know the >level of contribution someone makes from the statement on the title >page. > >Many editors in books of the kind Facet publishes are responsible for >far more than arranging others' work. They may well have come up with >the concept for the book, pitched it to the publisher, commissioned the >chapter authors (sometimes offering a very specific brief, which >includes intellectual content), "tidied up" the material the chapter >authors send and so on and so forth. It's difficult to know where, in >Darnton's communication cycle, this type of editor fits. And >questionable whether cataloguers have sufficient information to make a >judgment in each case. > >Tricky, veeeery tricky. > >Anne > > > > > > > >On 24/10/2012 13:04, "Helen Doyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >>A 20.2 contributor seems to me to be more concerned with bringing the >>Expression into being in whatever form it takes (RDA 20.2.1.1), >>whereas > >>a >>19.2 creator creates original work in the first place. If editors are >>(effectively) arranging chapters written by other people, then I would >>view them as contributors, rather than creators. >> >>I guess it depends how much original input the editors have. >> >>HelenD. >> >> >> >>Helen Doyle >>Assistant Librarian >> >>Royal Academy of Dance >>36 Battersea Square >>London >>SW11 3RA >>0207 326 8032 >> >> >>>>> Helen Williams <[log in to unmask]> 10/24/2012 12:32 pm >>> >>I thought we were at the Work level because an aggregate work had been >>compiled which effectively resulted in the creation of a new work. >>What > >>do others think? >> >> >> >>Also, although in MARC the editors would go in 700 fields, in the >>non-MARC format, do people see them fitting in 19.2 creator (which is >>where I ended up putting them) or 20.2 contributor? >> >>I was rather unsure about this. >> >>Helen >> >> >> >>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >>Freedman, Vanessa >>Sent: 24 October 2012 12:27 >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 >> >> >> >>Or are the individual chapters "expressions" and the compilation a >>"manifestation" (still can't get my head round FRBR)? >> >> >> >>Vanessa >> >> >> >>Vanessa Freedman >> >>Hebrew & Jewish Studies Librarian >> >>UCL Library Services >> >>University College London >> >>Gower Street >> >>London WC1E 6BT >> >> >> >>Tel: +44 (0) 20 7679 2598 (Internal ext. 32598) >> >>Fax: +44 (0) 20 7679 7373 >> >>E-mail: [log in to unmask] >> >>Website: www.ucl.ac.uk/library >> >> >> >>**Please remember the environment and only print this if necessary** >> >> >> >> >> >>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >>Amies, Paul >>Sent: 24 October 2012 12:09 >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 >> >> >> >>I used "compiler", although looking now at the definition of a >>compiler > >>that doesn't seem quite right. >> >>I think I was determined to select something from I.2 (associated with >>work) as it didn't seem right to use something from I.3 (associated >>with an expression), as surely we are at the level of "work" here? >> >> >> >>-- >> >>Paul Amies >> >>Cataloguer >> >>UCL Library Services >> >>University College London >> >>Gower Street >> >>London >> >>WC1E 6BT >> >> >> >>Tel: +44 (0)20 7679 2204 (Internal ext: 32204) >> >> >> >>E-mail: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >> >> >> >>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >>Helen Williams >>Sent: 24 October 2012 12:03 >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: Re: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 >> >> >> >>Looking at the notes in Debbie's record has reminded me of a good >>point > >>to make on this record - in all the records I've looked at so far I >>think we've all made the decision to enter all 4 editors, rather than >>use the option to abridge. >> >> >> >>Also, what do people think about relationship designators here. I was >>unsure whether to use editor, or editor of compilation. >> >> >> >>Helen >> >> >> >>From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of >>Helen Williams >>Sent: 24 October 2012 12:00 >>To: [log in to unmask] >>Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] Discussion of record 4 >> >> >> >>Let's kick off discussion of record 4 before lunchtime. >> >> >> >>Did anyone else add a related work for 'In series: Principles and >>practice in records management and archives' >> >>I wasn't quite sure how to format this either. >> >> >> >>Helen >> >> >> >>Helen Williams >> >>Assistant Librarian, Bibliographic Services >> >> >> >>LSE Library Services >> >>The London School of Economics and Political Science >> >>10 Portugal Street >> >>London WC2A 2HD >> >> >> >>[log in to unmask] >> >>020 7955 7234 >> >> >> >> >>Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic >>communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer >> >> >>Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic >>communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer >> >> >>Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic >>communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer >> >> >> > > >