<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1561" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=828115613-05122006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>Here at the
Boston Athenaeum, we use relator terms for corporate bodies (publishers, former
owners, printers, etc.), but we enter them as 653's after producing the
record and importing it into our local system. The decision to do so was made
long before my arrival here. I believe, however, the reason centered on the
fact we hold portions of personal libraries (e.g. Geo. Washington, J.Q. Adams),
and we wanted to have separate indexes for works generated by them and works the
formerly owned.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=828115613-05122006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=828115613-05122006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff>That said, we
would certainly welcome any initiative that would prompt OCLC to allow more
latitude in this area (and good luck with that, says the jaded OCLC cataloger).
It's a rare treat to come across a record containing 700's with relator terms,
as it's just a matter of changing the tags once the record is imported into our
system. Also, it can be a big time saver in determining the correct form of the
name, especially works published in Latin. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=828115613-05122006><FONT face=Arial
color=#0000ff></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=828115613-05122006><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT
size=2>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<BR>Will
Evans<BR>Rare Materials Catalog Librarian<BR>Biography & History
Bibliographer<BR>Boston Athenaeum<BR>10 1/2 Beacon Street<BR>Boston, MA
02108<BR><BR>Telephone: (617) 227-0270, ext. 243<BR>Fax: (617) 227-5266<BR><A
href="http://www.bostonathenaeum.org/">http://www.bostonathenaeum.org/</A><BR><BR>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<BR></FONT></P></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu] <B>On Behalf Of
</B>Robert Maxwell<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, December 04, 2006 7:10
PM<BR><B>To:</B> DCRM Revision Group List<BR><B>Subject:</B> [DCRM-L] Relator
terms<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dear
DCRMers,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>We seem to be
winding down somewhat on the final touches to DCRM, so I thought I'd introduce
another topic entirely :-) Speaking of which, MANY congratulations and thanks
to Manon, Deborah, and all you others who have contributed so much to
this!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>As many of you
are, we are an RLIN library working on the transition to OCLC. We've taped our
records to OCLC for years but never cataloged in the system. In order to
continue our PCC BIBCO work we recently applied for and were granted the
appropriate cataloging enhance statuses. However there was a small glitch.
OCLC wanted a set of sample records, and I chose a variety of BYU original
records that were already in OCLC through our tapeloading. This sample
included a few of my own cataloging records. Although we were given the
enhance status we needed, a few of the records were returned to me with
"problems" circled in red. And these "problems" were all on my records and
they were all instances where I had included relator terms with added entries
:-( </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>The OCLC examiners
had two issues: (1) LCRI 21.0D supposedly forbids the use of relator terms,
and (2) AACR2 only allows relators to be used with personal names, not
corporate bodies.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>Now the answer to
(1) seems fairly straightforward to me--LCRI 21.0D is explicitly labelled "LC
Practice", meaning it need not apply outside LC (and as a matter of fact I
happen to know that the LC Practice label was added specifically so that BIBCO
catalogers could use relator terms). </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>The answer to (2)
is a little more tricky--frankly I had never dreamed that we couldn't use "$e
printer" or "$e publisher" after a corporate body (e.g. Arion Press, $e
printer or Book Club of California, $e publisher), but now that it has been
pointed out to me 21.0D does in fact say "In the cases noted below, add [a]
... designation of function to an added entry for <EM>a
person</EM>". (MARC documentation certainly allows for use of relators
terms in 710 fields.) I was told by someone at LC that it had been
recently proposed to JSC to correct this and add corporate bodies to the rule
but it had been withdrawn pending RDA, but I don't remember anything about
such a proposal.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>As the new kid on
the block I don't really want to get a reputation for belligerency (and in
fact I really don't WANT to be belligerent!) but I do want to clarify this and
so I intend to bring it up with the person who examined our records, but after
I've consulted you folks. It does seem to me that relator terms add quite a
bit of value to entries, especially considering FRBR's emphasis on clarifying
the relationships between entities (e.g. between persons or corporate
bodies and works, expressions, manifestations, or items). They are also
essential to the indexing in our catalog. I am talking about relator
<EM>terms</EM>, not codes, by the way.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'd be interested
in your thoughts, on two fronts: (1) I have been assuming that most of the
rare cataloging community does use relator terms in their work, but I could be
wrong--so I'd be interested in hearing what your practice is (including do you
use them with corporate bodies, and does your library use them outside special
collections cataloging); and (2) those of you who are experienced OCLC
catalogers, including enhance libraries, do you use them in OCLC master
records? I suppose one could enhance or create the master record and then add
relators to the local record but that does seem a bit a shame to me
...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial size=2>And of course
anything else you have to say about this issue would be of great interest. And
any other tips on becoming a successful OCLC cataloging
entity!</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Thanks,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=253040423-04122006><FONT face=Arial
size=2>Bob</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT size=2>Robert L. Maxwell<BR>Special Collections and Ancient Languages
Catalog Librarian<BR>Genre/Form Authorities Librarian<BR>6728 Harold B. Lee
Library<BR>Brigham Young University<BR>Provo, UT 84602<BR>(801)422-5568
</FONT></P>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>