The organization of information
If you look at the manifestation record for the third edition of The organization of Information <jca20120437>, you will see that the statement of responsibility for this edition contains two names: “Arlene Taylor and Daniel N. Joudrey”. Joudrey is clearly a Related Person, but it is not clear what entity he is related to.
The statement of responsibility names two persons as authors of the third edition. Arlene Taylor is the author (Creator) of the work, but Daniel Joudrey is only the author of one edition (Expression). My tentative decision was to record Danny as a Related Person for the Expression <jca20120438>. This gives the relationship tree for the work shown on the page for this title. The relationship tree from the Person record for Joudrey looks like this:
I believe that this is the correct relationship. However, there are two further questions:
- What Relationship Designator applies to this Related Person relationship? In RDA I.3.1 (Relationship Designators for Contributors) – the only designators association with an Expression – the only possibility seems to be “Writer of Added Text” and the definition of that designator is limited to contributions to a primarily non-textual work.The preface to the third edition makes it clear that two authors collaborated on the revision. This suggests that the appropriate designator should be Author, but that is a designator for persons related to a Work. Is this collaborative revision a new work? I don’t think so, but RDA does not seem to account for persons, families, or corporate bodies who collaborated in the creation of an Expression. The language here is deliberately confuses RDA/FRBR concepts; how can this be resolved?
- Should the statement of responsibility in the Manifestation record be a Statement of Responsibility Relating to the Title Proper or a Statement of Responsibility Relating to the Edition? I chose to record it as the latter, because one of the persons named is only responsible for this edition. However, the statement is presented on the title page as a statement relating to authorship of the resource. Frankly, I’m not certain which practice is best.