[DCRM-L] Relator terms

Tue Dec 5 06:55:03 MST 2006

Same for the Folger. Plus the many relators for printers and booksellers
identified as a corporate body, of the "710 2_ Haeredes Nicolai
Bevilaquae, |e printer" variety   

	-----Original Message-----
	From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Hillyard, Brian
	Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 6:20 AM
	To: DCRM Revision Group List
	Subject: RE: [DCRM-L] Relator terms

	Bob

	One of the most common uses of relators in 710 must be for
indexing former ownership by institutions (e.g. monastic, British Museum
duplicates, and so on).  We would have hundreds if not thousands of
these.

	Best wishes

	Brian

	*********************************************

	Dr Brian Hillyard

	Rare Book Collections Manager

	National Library of Scotland

	George IV Bridge, Edinburgh EH1 1EW

	E-mail: b.hillyard at nls.uk

	Direct dial: +44 (0)131 623 3889

	Fax: +44 (0)131 623 3888

________________________________

	From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu
[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
	Sent: 05 December 2006 00:10
	To: DCRM Revision Group List
	Subject: [DCRM-L] Relator terms

	Dear DCRMers,

	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!

	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 :-( 

	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.

	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). 

	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 a person". (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.

	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
terms, not codes, by the way.

	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 ...

	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!

	Thanks,

	Bob

	Robert L. Maxwell
	Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
	Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
	6728 Harold B. Lee Library
	Brigham Young University
	Provo, UT 84602
	(801)422-5568 

*******************************************************************
	Visit the National Library of Scotland online at www.nls.uk

*******************************************************************
	This communication is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you
	are not the intended recipient, please notify the ICT Helpdesk
on
	+44 131 623 3700 or ict at nls.uk and delete this e-mail. The
	statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of
the
	author and do not necessarily reflect those of the National
Library of
	Scotland. This message is subject to the Data Protection Act
1998 
	and Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 and has been 
	scanned by MessageLabs.

*******************************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20061205/eceda5d7/attachment.htm 