Manifestations and Near-Equivalents: Theory, with Special Attention to Moving-Image Materials
Differences between manifestations (i.e., FRBR expressions) and near-equivalents (i.e., FRBR manifestations) that might be considered significant by catalog users are examined. Anglo-American cataloging practice concerning when to make a new record is examined. Definitions for manifestation (i.e., expression), title manifestation, and near-equivalent (i.e., FRBR manifestation) are proposed. It is suggested that current practice leads to making too many separate records for near-equivalents. It is recommended that practice be changed so that near-equivalents are more often cataloged on the same record. Next, differences between manifestations (i.e., expressions) and near-equivalents (i.e., FRBR manifestations) of moving-image works are examined, and their significance to users of moving-image works is assessed. It is suggested that true manifestations (i.e., expressions) result when the continuity, i.e., visual aspect of the work, or the soundtrack, i.e., audio aspet of the work, or the textual aspect of the work actually differ, whether due to editing, the appending of new material, or the work of subsidiary authors creating subtitles, new music tracks, etc. Title manifestations can occur when the title or billing order differs without there being any underlying difference in continuity. Distribution information can differ without there being any underlying difference in continuity, creating a near-equivalent (i.e., FRBR manifestation). Finally, physical variants or near-equivalents (i.e., FRBR manifestations) can occur when physical format differs without the involvement of subsidiary authors.