Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0047023837 = product of:
  0.009404767 = sum of:
    0.009404767 = product of:
      0.018809535 = sum of:
        0.018809535 = weight(_text_:m in 4840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018809535 = score(doc=4840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.114023164 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045820985 = queryNorm
            0.1649624 = fieldWeight in 4840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4884486 = idf(docFreq=9980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Here's the problem: take any spiritual communication in published form. You have the medium who physically delivers the message and the originating spirit who generated the message. Who should get credit? If you're a cataloger, you'll know that this is no idle question since the work has to be attributed to someone. The author of this article, Nancy M. Babb, a cataloger at SUNY Buffalo, stresses that giving credit to the spirit illustrates the advance in cataloging over the centuries in that a "bibliographic" entity is preferred over a "biographical" one. Such considerations are "exemplar of complex authorship", Babb argues. They illustrate a more "inclusive and expansive concept" of authorship; one that is centered on "what will be of most value to catalog users". Babb in this breathless review of cataloging history confirms what many of us have long suspected, namely, that "an author need not physically exist to have recognized bibliographic identity within the library catalog.