Re: [ACAT] RDA Question

On 10/10/2011 21:05, Daniel CannCasciato wrote:

<snip>
While I don’t mind the display aspect all that much, I do find the heading of
“White, Michael, Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Eric Idle, Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones, Michael Palin, et al.”
to be somewhat iffy for implementation – – as Bill Walker mentioned, do systems handle retrieval and indexing for these types of headings?
</snip>

If I understand this correctly, the question is whether all of those names represent a *single* heading? Well, I certainly hope not since that would be a step so far backward, I don’t know how far in the past it would go!

Still, in FRBR terms, the “work” entity would contain all of these “creators”, and would all be imported as a single item. Therefore, in relational database terms, instead of as it is now (in MARCXML):

<datafield tag=”130″ ind1=”1″ ind2=”0″>
<subfield code=”a”>Monty Python and the Holy Grail</subfield>
</datafield>

and each author/creator has to be added separately to the record, while
in an FRBR type of structure, the entire work record has it all and
would be something like:

<work>
<title>Monty Python and the Holy Grail</title>
<creator>White, Michael</creator>
<creator>Chapman, Graham</creator>
<creator>Cleese, John</creator>
[and so on]
</work>

so all would be imported at once.

It could be that this is what the example displays.

Where the [et al.] (or in RDA-speak, the [and others]) would be placed in FRBR terms (in the work, expression, manifestation or item), I do not know. Also, I am not saying that this kind of structure would be any kind of substantive improvement from what we have now.

-331

Share