No abstract

The paper reports findings from a study to identify characteristics of serials with title changes and then make recommendations for recognizing new works for these serials. Findings show title changes occur due to underlying subject, function, corporate, geographic, frequency, or format changes, with 80.8% of the changes being subject or function changes. It is recommended that reasons for title changes be determined from clear statements in text or elsewhere, and that new works be recognized based upon the requirements of a definition of a work. With the FRBR definition, a new work would be recognized only for a significant subject or function change. Serials Review 2011; 37:275-289.

This artlcle reports the results of research designed to explore the feasibility of automatically deriving name access points from machine-readable title pages of English language monographs. Two questions were asked: (1) To what degree is it possible to specify formal criteria for extracting from the title pages of monographs in machine-readable form the names of those persons and corporate bodies who have contributed significantly to the creation of the monographs in question? and (2) Are title page data adequate for automatically generating name access points from English language monographs in machine-readable form? Results show that approximately 88% of the access points selected by the Library of Congress or the National Library of Medicine could be automatically derived from title page data. These results have implications for the design of bibliographic standards and online catalogs.

No abstract

The problem addressed in this paper is that of simplifying access point determination. A critique is made of the simple, mechanical rule whereby every name appearing in certain designatable locations within a publication qualifies as an access point. Then a more acceptable version of the every-name-an-access-point rule is tested empirically against a sample of 400 English language monographs. Conclusions reached concern (1) the responsibility profiles of these monographs, i.e., how many authors, editors, illustrators and emanators are typically associated with them and in what combinations, and (2) the relative productivity of different locations within them, e.g., title pages and tables of contents, as sources of access points. The study was conceived to be exploratory in nature and its findings suggest further research that could be done to provide empirical validation for rules for access point determination.-