Posting to RDA-L
The entries are organized by his role in each film: actor, director, producer, soundtrack, composer, miscellaneous crew, camera and electrical equipment. This is a very user-friendly organization.
The whole point to RDA is to allow properly differentiated and interconnected elements to thrive in these kinds of displays. Burying data in text descriptions is just that– burying. It’s wasted effort, and the data is of limited utility, happily living in flat file card-like environments, but not much use elsewhere. It’s true that making full use of RDA elements in MARC is a problem, but it would be wise to assert that it is MARC that has the problem, not RDA.
It may not be so much a MARC problem, but a conscious decision among catalogers quite some time back that continuing this sort of access was unwarranted. Adding relator codes have always been possible http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaterm.html but, while I cannot point to a decision from where I am currently, it was obviously decided that it was not worth the effort. At this point, I can point to some cards http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_gU8TOkockqs/TKO77DZVvSI/AAAAAAAAAi4/_WHr-zMo_ac/s1600/loc-card-catalog-entries-sep-2010.jpg, that show earlier practices of “joint author”, and “comp.”
The original LC AACR2 Rule Interpretation on relators apparently was issued in 1982, p. 29-30, when they decided not to apply the option, except for “ill.” for illustrators of added entries. http://www.loc.gov/cds/PDFdownloads/csb/CSB_018.pdf. In addition, certain communities went their own ways, e.g. the art cataloging community for access for artists such as Albrecht Durer, who fulfilled many roles.
There is a lot of metadata that could be added to records that is considered not worth the effort. It’s important to distinguish between a complete lack of access (i.e. when a name is not recorded at all) as opposed to more “specific” access, such as being able to limit a search to someone as an editor, a publisher, a producer, a “joint author”, and so on, although the person’s heading can still be found.
Of course, any information at all can be added, but the unavoidable question is: is it worth the effort to distinguish “blurb writer” from “licensor”? A practice that can be achieved only by 1% or 5% of the cataloging community cannot be considered practicable for the entire cataloging community.
Perhaps in highly specific databases, it is worth the effort but for a general cataloger, practical matters must enter into it somewhere. And *especially so* today since the cataloging community is facing highly restricted budgets for a long time to come.