For last week’s Third Thursday training on Using the RDA Toolkit, we cataloged a book in a non-MARC environment: post-its on posterboard with yarn relationships. It includes all core elements (and some non-core elements that we judged helpful for clarity, selection), taken from appropriate sources of information, and recorded/transcribed according to RDA rules.
Great expectations / Charles Dickens ; retold by Clare West. (OCLC #182520269)
We recently got a collection of simplified editions of classic works. For example, where the original says:
My father’s family name being Pirrip, and my Christian name Philip, my infant tongue could make of both names nothing longer or more explicit than Pip. So, I called myself Pip, and came to be called Pip.
This version says:
My first name was Philip, but when I was a small child I could only manage to say Pip. So Pip was what everybody called me.
I wondered, is this a new expression of the work “Great Expectations” created by Charles Dickens? (maybe an adaptation or free translation?) or is it a whole new work? Who should be recorded as the creator?
RDA 184.108.40.206 includes as an example this very situation (and this very title, but with a different reteller):
Great expectations / Charles Dickens ; retold by Florence Bell
and indicates that “Florence Bell” should be recorded as the creator of the (new) work.
Laboratory evaluations of stabilized flue gas desulfurization sludge (scrubber sludge) and aggregate mixtures / by Mark Anderson, Gary W. Sharpe, David L. Allen, Herbert F. Southgate and Robert C. Deen. (OCLC #884361903)
When I first started cataloging ebooks, the standard was to catalog them as electronic reproductions of print, and with a separate record for each platform that provided the title. This made some sense, but was frustrating for copy cataloging when you’d see only a skimpy record for the copy you had access to, but a robust popular record for the copy from another vendor.
In 2009, the preferred standard changed to provider-neutral records; that is, all copies of a particular ebook should now be cataloged on a single record with 856 fields for each link that provides access to it. Fields in this record describe an electronic resource (rather than mainly describing print, with reproduction notes in a 533) and do not include details that only apply to specific platforms, such as added entries for the distributor or 506 notes describing restrictions on access. Such details can be added to local catalogs if they are helpful to patrons.
Since a single provider-neutral record can be used for manifestations with various carriers (PDF, HTML, plain text) but not all carriers (excludes print, microform), the level of cataloging is somewhere between expression and manifestation.
Government documents are often available in multiple formats (print, electronic, microform). An older cataloging practice was to have a single bibliographic record representing the title in all formats (manifestations), but now we catalog each format on its own bibliographic record. In a FRBR or linked data environment where we are storing statements rather than pre-gathered records, there would be less of a distinction here.