IAML Cataloguing Commission

Officers Meeting

with invited guests: ISBD Sub-Commission and UNIMARC Sub-Commission Chairs

Tuesday 17 November 2015

9:30 EST

15:30 Europe

Attendees: Anders, Daniel, Isabelle, Joseph, Massimo

Regrets:

1. Approval of agenda

2. Review of "Terms of reference" - draft made after NYC meeting

Edits by Massimo: Cataloguing Commission Terms of Reference DRAFT REVISED BASED ON NYC MEETINGS_rev.mgt.docx

3. Follow-ups from the New York Meeting

report from the 2015 meeting

4. DOREMUS tutorial session hosted by the Cataloguing Commission (Isabelle)

5. Unimarc proposals regarding fictitious characters (Daniel)

6. Planning for Rome

7. Planning our next Officers and Chairs meeting. Do we need a members online/conference meeting?

8. Other business

Doodle Poll to find date to meet: http://doodle.com/poll/rirmf8xu4eyg3ipb 

We could use this free conference calling method: http://www.freeconferencecall.com

• Dial-in Numbers: 

• CANADA: (605) 562-3107 

• DENMARK: +45 78 77 25 22

• FRANCE: +33 (0) 7 55 50 02 62

• ITALY: +39 02 8998 2260

• Participant Access Code: 290361

• (for Joseph: Host Access Code: 580722)

UNIMARC 223 / Cast and characters

In order to have a basis for discussion, here is an extract from the draft minutes of the Cape Town informal meeting of the PUC, where the issue was discussed in order to inform us on how to proceed:

2015/9:  U/A 223, 423, 523:  Authorized, Variant, and Related Access Points for Character

The names of characters may link with the names of cast members at the Expression level.  Mr. Dunsire notes that the FRBR Library Reference Model redefines persons as limited to real-world entities.  RDA and other descriptive conventions have already conflated real-world persons and fictitious characters, which are appellations of things not in the real world.  Real and fictitious characters deserve to be distinguished.  ISNIs are name identifiers, not person identifiers.  Relationships are among persons, not names, so relationships (such as spouse, parent, and child) among fictional characters are not a proper application of the model.  There is certainly a use case for access to character names.  We may need to establish a new relationship between Nomens, possibly creating a new subtype of Res (thing) for fictitious character, possibly with corresponding subtypes for fictitious places, things, and so on, but to be distinguished from pseudonyms, which are one or more names in the real world, as fictitious names come from Manifestation (for example, Statement of responsibility).  RDA is currently in the process of clarifying the difference between “transcription” (the exact representation of data preserving the form and content of the prescribed source of information, including the capitalization and punctuation of the source; that is, how a resource describes itself) and “recording” (the accurate notation of data without regard to its exact representation).  The upshot of this lengthy discussion is that a new U/A 623 field could be created for (Fictitious) Character.  The proposed indicators may need to be reconsidered to allow the ability to distinguish among fictitious personal, corporate, and family character names.  It may be wise to confer with the French representatives to determine the extent to which these distinctions are needed and how closely the U/A 623 field and subfield structure should correspond to those for real-world entities.  The FRBR LRM expects applications that are based on it to respect its structure, and this would allow UNIMARC to do so.

Here is a revised version of the proposal: 2015-9_A223_ver_0.7.doc