The Prentice-Hall Model letter desk book : ready-to-use letters for every occasion. (OCLC #11252172)

This volume has a note in its front matter indicating its relationship to another work, which has been recorded in a note:

500 __ ǂa "Reprinted from Secretary's standard reference manual and guide."--Page 2.

and as an access point:

700 1_ ǂa De Vries, Mary Ann. ǂt Secretary's standard reference manual and guide.

This volume is 64 pages long, where “Secretary’s standard…” is 307 pages long, so this is likely an excerpt of only the parts about letter-writing. So which relationship designator to use?


Highlights from the August release of RDA Toolkit

RDA has always allowed use of “another concise term” (RDA I.1) as a relationship designator if there is no sufficiently specific term on the included lists, but I’m pleased to see so many new ones being added to that official list. For example, this month:

Relationship Designators for Creators

remix artist – A person, family, or corporate body responsible for creating an audio work by manipulating, recombining, mixing, and reproducing previously recorded sounds. Remixing activities that do not substantially change the nature and content of the original work, and mixing recorded tracks together to appear as one continuous track are excluded. See also DJ; mixing engineer.

Relationship Designators for Contributors

DJ – A person, family, or corporate body who mixes recorded tracks together during a live performance or in a recording studio to appear as one continuous track. Remixing activities that substantially change the nature and content of the original work, resulting in a new work, and mixing and assembling the multiple tracks of a recording are excluded. See also mixing engineer, remix artist.

dubbing director – A person, family, or corporate body responsible for the general management and supervision of the process of adding new dialogue or other sounds to complete the sound track for an expression.

music programmer – A person, family, or corporate body contributing to an expression of a musical work by using electronic audio devices and/or computer software to generate sounds. The creation of a new musical work is excluded. See also composer.

Photo by Mattandkendo (Template:Paul vinken) [CC BY-SA 3.0], via Wikimedia Commons


WEconomics : Italy / a film by Melissa Young, Mark Dworkin. (OCLC #944445213)

The LC-PCC PS for RDA 18.5 Relationship Designators says to follow the PCC Training Manual for Applying Relationship Designators in Bibliographic Records, and to record terms MARC 1XX/7XX subfield $e, $i, or $j as appropriate.

The manual includes guidelines such as recording relationship designators for all access points whenever it is clear what the relationship is, as in:

    700 1_ ǂa Dworkin, Mark, ǂe film director.

and examples of what to do when more than one relationship designator is appropriate, as in:

    700 1_ ǂa Young, Melissa, ǂe film director, ǂe film producer.

Nerve : how a small Kentucky town led the fight to safely dismantle the world’s chemical weapons / a film by Ben Evans & the Kentucky Environmental foundation ; with music by Ben Sollee. (OCLC #937869675)

Which relationship designator should be used for the composer/performer of original music for a film, so often expressed in the credits as “music by”? I included that version in the Creation/Production Credits Note:

508 00 ǂa Directed and produced by Ben Evans; music by Ben Sollee.

But am a little bit nervous about my relationship designators for the authorized access point:

700 1_ ǂa Sollee, Ben, ǂe composer (expression), ǂe instrumentalist.

RDA I.3.1 defines composer (expression) as “A person … contributing to an expression by adding music to a work that originally lacked it, by composing new music to substitute for the original music, or by composing new music to supplement the existing music.” which seems accurate, but a bit off. Similar designators seem to refer specifically to musical works.


Ulozhenie Timura / redaktor Raʺno Azimova. (OCLC #31206018)

The statement of responsibility is recorded as it appears on the piece, where terms describing the role are generally in the language of the resource:

245 00 ǂa Ulozhenie Timura / ǂc redaktor Raʺno Azimova.

It may also not be consistent within a given language, or may not be stated explicitly at all. The type of role can be normalized using a relationship designator term with the authorized access point:

700 1_ ǂa Azimova, Raʺno, ǂe editor.

South Union Shaker Village / photographs and text by David Toczko ; foreword by the Sabbathday Lake Shakers. (OCLC #875257539)

At a recent conference, I went to a cataloging “Ask the Experts” panel, and shared my grumpiness about RDA’s lack of “writer of foreword” relationship designator. They pointed me toward the general instruction which says “If none of the terms listed in this appendix is appropriate or sufficiently specific, use another concise term to indicate the nature of the relationship.”

So what do you think? Is it reasonable to just use “writer of foreword” (as I’ve done on this record) or is this a slippery slope?