[DCRM-L] Relationship designators

[Ryan Hildebrand]

John,

Yes, but these changes actually align the RBMS terms with the form found in the MARC list, where they are not abbreviated. -Ryan



From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of JOHN C ATTIG
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 2:48 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Relationship designators

Is there a procedure for communicating these changes to LC for incorporation in the MARC code list?

        John
________________________________
From: "Ryan Hildebrand" <ryan.hildebrand at austin.utexas.edu<mailto:ryan.hildebrand at austin.utexas.edu>>
To: "DCRM Revision Group List" <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:38:42 PM
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Relationship designators

Fyi, at the last BSC meeting, expansion of abbreviated relator terms was approved. So, comp., ed., ill., and trans. are now officially "compiler," "editor," "illustrator," and "translator." These changes will be reflected in the next update of the RBMS Controlled Vocabularies. -Ryan





--

Ryan Hildebrand

Book Cataloging Dept. Head

Carl and Lily Pforzheimer Foundation Curator
Harry Ransom Center
University of Texas at Austin
P.O. Box 7219
Austin, TX 78713-7219

512-232-1681

www.hrc.utexas.edu<http://www.hrc.utexas.edu>

Editor, RBMS Controlled Vocabularies


From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Allison Jai O'Dell
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 2:11 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Relationship designators

This is exactly what I have done.

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Valerie Buck <valerie_buck at byu.edu<mailto:valerie_buck at byu.edu>> wrote:

I've been using both RDA and RBMS relationship designators. But if the RBMS designator is abbreviated, I have opted to spell it out.


Re: subsequent relator terms:  is there an online catalog model that would have numerous |e in MARC format make sense for indexing?  I can only think of two approaches -- either treat the entire 7xx field as a single phrase for indexing, or treat it as a set of hierarchical terms (as in http://beta.freelibrary.org).  In neither case would duplicate |e really facilitate collocation.



Allison


Allison Jai O'Dell
Charles Dickens Cataloging Consultant
Rare Book Department
The Free Library of Philadelphia
Follow @FLP_Dickens<http://twitter.com/FLP_Dickens> on Twitter!





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20120724/0c15ce39/attachment-0001.htm>