I found a record for "The shaft" DVD at Vancouver Public Library. The
catalogue record had also
246 $iOriginal title:$aDown
I suppose as a remake, "De Lift" should be a related work heading on any
record for Down/The shaft. A work-to-work relationship in FRBR terms-not
one work issued under two different titles.
This information about "De Lift" came out from the review attached to
the IMDb record-a plus for user-supplied social networking data. An
interesting question arises. Say that the cataloguers would always miss
that data, but a user found this relationship and supplied it. Would
someone then make a more formal link (a 730 field or equivalent) in a
catalogue record in some sort of global next gen catalogue? Or is that
title information just loose data that other end-users could make use of
if necessary? I would say that information from the end-user should be a
trigger for more formal use of data fields with the final decision made
by librarians. If the fields exist and these are the FRBR entities and
relationships of concern for bibliographic control, then the data should
be filled in correctly in the next gen catalogue.
>>Thomas, where did you get the information that "Down" was the original
title? Maybe that's buried somewhere on IMDb, but it's not something an
average moviegoer would know, I think. IMDb says it's a remake of a 1983
Dutch film, De lift.
Thomas Brenndorfer, B.A, M.L.I.S.
Guelph Public Library
100 Norfolk St.
Guelph, ON
N1H 4J6
(519) 824-6220 ext. 276
tbrenndorfer_at_library.guelph.on.ca
Received on Mon May 14 2007 - 17:46:07 EDT