[DCRM-L] BL Proposal 6JSC/BL/8 on relationships with works of unknown or uncertain origin

Wed Aug 1 16:45:39 MDT 2012

Elizabeth,

I am pleased you brought this to our attention, and I think you make a number of excellent points, including the idea that attribution is probably best considered as a distinct qualifier element, separate from role (or relationship). As you point out, CCO (and the LIDO schema) have logically created a separate element for qualification data. Other example values given in LIDO for qualification include: studio of, workshop of, atelier of, office of, assistant of, associate of, pupil of, follower of, school of, circle of, style of, after copyist of, manner of. I think some of these qualifiers might be of use to our community too.

To my mild surprise, I notice now that MARC has even defined an “attribution qualifier” field already, in $j (of x00 fields). See:

http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx00.html

Should the RBMS relator term for “attributed name” be used in $j?  I’ve only ever seen it in $e.

This item has not yet generated discussion among CC:DA, so far as I know, but I would be happy to convey our concerns.

Francis

-----Original Message-----
From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu]<mailto:[mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu]> On Behalf Of Elizabeth O'Keefe
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 12:35 PM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>
Subject: [DCRM-L] BL Proposal 6JSC/BL/8 on relationships with works of unknown or uncertain origin

A paper on recording relationships of persons, families, and corporate bodies to works of unknown or uncertain origin was recently posted on the JSC website by the British Library:

http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-BL-8.pdf

This situation probably occurs more frequently in special collections cataloging than in any other type of library cataloging, so I wanted to share my observations on the proposal with others on this list.

Special collections contain many resources that cannot be attributed with certainty to a person, family, or corporate body, so the new instruction in Proposal  6JSC/Bl/8, 19.3.1.4, is very welcome. But I have reservations about the use of the relationship designator field to carry this information, and about limiting the scope of the proposal  to the work level.

The new instruction reads:

19.3.1.4 Other Person, Family, or Corporate Body Associated with Works of Uncertain or Unknown Origin If a work of uncertain or unknown origin has been attributed to one or more person, family, or corporate body, but the person, family, or corporate body actually responsible for creation of the work, in [typo for "is"] uncertain, record the persons, families, and corporate bodies attributed to the work, in accordance with the general guidelines on recording relationships to persons, families, and corporate bodies associated with a resource given under 18.4 RDA.

The proposed term is:

attributed creator A person, family, or corporate body for whom there is, or once was, substantial authority for designating as creator of the related work

All the other relationship designators in Appendix I identify roles.

Attribution information is not the same as role information. It does not identify a role, it indicates present uncertainty about whether the named entity performed that role, or the fact that the role was previously but incorrectly attributed to the entity. This is a separate type of information, and should be treated separately. Cf. the treatment of attribution information in Cataloging Cultural Objects, a standard for describing art and cultural works. CCO treats attribution as a separate data element qualifying the names of creators and other entities responsible for or associated with an object.

Example:

Name: Ricci, Marco

Role: painter

Qualifier: attributed to

RDA does not define uncertainty as a separate data element. Doing so would be very useful, not just for relationships between persons, families, and corporate bodies and resources, but for relationships between resources and relationships between persons, families, and corporate bodies. Perhaps RDA will do this someday.  In the meantime, this information has to be carried somewhere, and there is precedent for using a relator term, "attributed name", to carry attribution information, so the relationship designator seems the only viable option for now.

However, the proposed term, "attributed creator", limits its use to works. This is the intention of the  authors of the proposal: "based on our experience we see no compelling justification for equivalent changes at expression or manifestation level."

But attributed names are not associated solely with works. Looking only at the OPACS of the Morgan Library and the Folger, I was able to find attributed names on the expression, manifestation, and item level:

Expression level: translator, compiler, illustrator, illuminator

Manifestation level: printer, publisher, writer of manuscript (as opposed to creator of its content)

Item level: binder, annotator

I'm sure subscribers to this list could come up with many more examples.

There is no generic equivalent to "creator" for persons associated with expressions, manifestations, and items. The relator term currently appearing in the RBMS and MARC code list, "attributed name" would be preferable to "attributed creator", since it could be used for relationships on all four FRBR levels.

One other point: The proposed term does not distinguish between current and former attributions. This is an extremely useful distinction, especially for art works, where attributions frequently change, and where it is desirable to record previous attributions. Using two different terms, "attributed name" and "formerly attributed name"  would save users having to scan the notes to discover whether the attribution is current or rejected.

I would be very interested in hearing what other special collections catalogers think about the BL proposal.

Liz O'Keefe

Elizabeth O'Keefe

Director of Collection Information Systems The Morgan Library & Museum

225 Madison Avenue

New York, NY  10016-3405

TEL: 212 590-0380

FAX: 212-768-5680

NET: eokeefe at themorgan.org<mailto:eokeefe at themorgan.org>

Visit CORSAIR, the Library’s comprehensive collections catalog, now on the web at http://corsair.themorgan.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20120801/b78511d9/attachment.htm>