[DCRM-L] RDA revision proposal -- Publication (etc.) statements

Wed Aug 21 07:23:37 MDT 2013

LC is submitting a proposal to the JSC that would introduce a number of significant changes to RDA guidelines concerning Production, Publication, Distribution, and Manufacture (RDA 2.7-2.10). The changes are numerous enough that I find it hard to offer a summary without exceeding the length of the proposal itself, so I offer instead the entire "Background" portion of the proposal (below). The full proposal (including the proposed changes to the RDA text) can be found here:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-LC-24.pdf

Generally, the changes proposed would bring RDA guidelines closer to conventions established in DCRM(B) (and subsequent manuals). At first glance, I see one potential problem with the way the proposal treats grammatically inseparable information belonging to another element; I've inserted a comment at the relevant portion of the proposal.

I hope some of you will have time to scrutinize this and offer your comments, which I can pass along through CC:DA. Of the proposals going to the JSC in November, this is probably the most relevant to our community.

Francis

Background

This proposal offers several changes to instructions within 2.7 (Production Statement), 2.8 (Publication Statement), 2.9 (Distribution Statement), and 2.10 (Manufacture Statement). The proposed changes are listed below with the rationale after each.

We did not propose changes to the glossary definitions, but they may need to be updated as a result of JSC decisions on the glossary definitions and scope statements.

Change #1: Add instruction to 2.7.1.4 about recording statements containing inseparable information belonging to another element. Move the optional omission for levels of corporate hierarchy from 2.7.1.4 to 2.7.4.3. Add a reference at 2.7.4.3 to 21.2 for the producer of an unpublished resource.

Rationale: Currently, there are no instructions within the production, publication, distribution, or manufacture elements about recording statements that contain grammatically inseparable information belonging to another element (e.g., Stereotyped, printed, and sold by H. & E. Phinney). While this phenomenon is most often associated with rare materials cataloging, it also occurs in modern publications, especially those having statements in inflected languages. To split the statements up into multiple elements may result in unhelpful, nonsensical data, and challenges the principle of representation. Therefore, we have proposed adding such instructions for the production, publication, distribution, and manufacture elements.

FL comments (apply also to parallel parts of changes 2-4): The proposed instructions say to "transcribe the information in the order found." This instruction incompletely echoes DCRM(B) 4A3.3: "...transcribe them in the order found and supply missing elements in square brackets as needed (see 0G6<https://desktop.loc.gov/template.htm?view=document&doc_action=setdoc&doc_keytype=foliodestination&doc_key=dcrmb0G6&hash=0G6>)." What appears lacking are instructions comparable to DCRM(B) 4B8 and 4D1.4, which say to supply information for these elements (place and date, respectively) when the data is transcribed elsewhere (i.e. in the name of publisher, etc.). The present LC proposal does not go on to tell us where to transcribe the inseparable information (i.e. which element). I think the proposal needs to introduce language comparable to 2.5.2.6 (which treats a grammatically inseparable designation of edition). Does this work? Am I missing something?

In addition, we propose to move the Optional Omission for omitting levels of corporate hierarchy to the sections on recording the name sub-elements. When levels of corporate hierarchy are recorded, they are recorded as part of the name (not place or date),so that is where instructions on omitting them should be located. Our proposal moves the Optional Omission from 2.7.1.4 (Recording Production Statements) to 2.7.4.3 (Recording Producers' Names). It does not change the wording of the Optional Omission.

Finally, we have noticed that many catalogers confuse these transcribed elements in Chapter 2 with the Group 2 entities associated with a manifestation in Chapter 21. The former is based on transcription from a resource, and the latter expresses the relationship between the entity and the manifestation. We propose adding a reference to 21.2 (Producer of an Unpublished Resource) at 2.7.4.3 to help clarify this distinction. Cf. Changes #2-4 for similar changes to publication, distribution, and manufacture statements.

Change #2: Add instruction to 2.8.1.4 about recording a publication statement to improve readability and consistency. Add instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information belonging to another element. Move the optional omission for levels of corporate hierarchy from 2.8.1.4 to 2.8.4.3. Add a reference at 2.8.4.3 to 21.3 for the publisher.

Rationale: We noticed that there is an instruction for recording a production statement at 2.7.1.4, but no equivalent instructions for publication, distribution, and manufacture. Instead, these sections begin with instructions for recording the sub-elements. In a section called "Recording X Statements," it is logical to provide an instruction to record the entire statement before instructions for specific parts of the statement. We have proposed a sentence paralleling that of 2.7.1.4 for instruction on recording publication, distribution, and manufacture statements (cf. Changes #3-4). This addition improves readability and consistency.

See Change #1 for rationale about adding instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information, moving the Optional Omission for omitting levels of corporate hierarchy, and adding a reference to 21.3.

Change #3: Add instruction to 2.9.1.4 about recording a distribution statement to improve readability and consistency. Add instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information belonging to another element. Move the optional omission for levels of corporate hierarchy from 2.9.1.4 to 2.9.4.3. Add a reference at 2.9.4.3 to 21.4 for the distributor.

Rationale: See Change #2 for rationale to add an instruction at 2.9.1.4 for recording a distribution statement. See Change #1 for rationale about adding instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information, moving the Optional Omission for omitting levels of corporate hierarchy, and adding a reference to 21.4.

Change #4: In 2.10.1.4, remove conditions and first optional addition for recording manufacture statements so that recording the manufacture statement is the basic instruction. Add instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information belonging to another element. Move the optional omission for levels of corporate hierarchy from 2.10.1.4 to 2.10.4.3. Add a reference at 2.10.4.3 to 21.5 for the manufacturer.

Rationale: In addition to changes paralleling those of Changes #1-3, we have proposed further revisions to the instructions at 2.10.1.4. We noticed a discrepancy between 2.9.1.4 and 2.10.1.4. 2.10.1.4 is very restrictive in allowing manufacture statements to be recorded at all and seems to contain conditions that are already part of the core element statement at 2.10. We think manufacture statements are as useful as distribution statements for identifying manifestations, so we propose to make the instructions parallel.

See also Change #2 for the rationale of the specific wording of the basic recording instruction at 2.10.1.4. See Change #1 for rationale about adding instruction about recording statements containing inseparable information, moving the "Optional Omission" for omitting levels of corporate hierarchy, and  adding a reference to 21.6.

Change #5: Expand scope statement at 2.7.4.1.
Change #6: Expand scope statement at 2.8.4.1.
Change #7: Expand scope statement at 2.9.4.1.
Change #8: Expand scope statement at 2.10.4.1.

Rationale: The second group of changes involves expanding the scope statement for each of the "name" sub-elements. A producer's, etc. "name" as it appears on the resource may refer to a person, family, or corporate body but not actually contain the proper name of a person, etc. In this context, the name may be a "characterizing word or phrase" (cf. 9.2.2.25), and there may be a statement of function with no name at all (cf. examples proposed for 2.8.4.4, 2.9.4.4, and 2.10.4.4). Although there are instructions on statements of function under each of the name sub-element instructions, the statement of function is not mentioned in the definition of the name. It should be included in the scope statements to synchronize the scope and instructions hierarchy. We propose the addition of two sentences to the scope instruction for the producer's, etc. names. The first sentence will add language about "characterizing word or phrase" as a name. The second sentence will add language about a name including a statement of function.

Change #9: Add instruction at 2.7.4.4 for recording statements of function with no name.

Rationale: Although it seems logical to record a statement of function with no name, there are no explicit instructions to do so in 2.7.4.4. Statements of function for these Chapter 2 sub-elements are similar in form and role to statements of responsibility. These statements of function are useful in identifying different manifestations of a work just as statements of responsibility are. Also, they may clarify the specific role performed by a producer, etc., just as a statement of responsibility might clarify the role of a person, etc. in creating or contributing to the content of a resource. 2.4.1.9 includes instructions for recording statements of responsibility that do not name a specific person, etc., so we propose to add a similar instruction at 2.7.4.4. Cf. Changes #10-12 for changes to statements of function for publisher, distributor, and manufacturer.

Change #10: At 2.8.4.4, delete restriction on recording statement of function and add instruction for recording statements of function with no name.

Rationale: Currently, 2.8.4.4 does not allow a statement of function to be recorded with the publisher's name unless the function is more than solely publishing. If the preferred source of information reads "Published by Isaac Riley," the basic instruction says to record "Isaac Riley," and there is no further instruction or optional addition to transcribe a statement of function that appears in the resource. This is inconsistent with the other sub-elements in Chapter 2 (Producer's Name, Distributor's Name and Manufacturer's Name), which say to "record words or phrases indicating the function performed by a person, family, or corporate body as they appear on the source of information." We would like to remove this restriction (which was also part of AACR2) for these reasons:

1)      Differences between publication statements help users identify different manifestations of a work. This is especially important for manifestations without ISBNs, which did not appear on manifestations until the later part of the 20th century. One manifestation of a work might say "Published by Isaac Riley" and another might say "Isaac Riley, Publisher." In this example, the difference in statement of functions is essential in identifying the appropriate manifestation of the resource, so there is no rationale for instructing catalogers to omit them.

2)      Publisher's name is a transcribed sub-element. However, by instructing catalogers to remove statements of function, part of the transcription is lost. Also, often in inflected languages the publisher's name is grammatically integrated with the statement of function, so by removing the statement of function, the publisher's name is left declined with no context.

Finally, we note that sometimes a statement of function appears without a name. An example of this would be "Published by the author." Currently in RDA, there are no instructions in 2.8 that allow for such data to be transcribed as part of the publication statement (the prohibition on statement of function prevents this statement from being transcribed at all). In addition to this being a common occurrence for early printed resources, it also happens frequently on modern vanity press publications. We feel that such data is part of the sub-element and should be recorded as part of that sub-element. Therefore, we have also proposed instructions for transcribing such statements of function with no name. See Change #9 for further explanation of this proposed change.

Change #11: Add instruction at 2.9.4.4 for recording statements of function with no name.
Change #12: Add instruction at 2.10.4.4 for recording statements of function with no name.
Rationale: See Change #9 for explanation of these proposed changes.

[The entire proposal: http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-LC-24.pdf]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20130821/99378ff7/attachment-0001.html>