I really think that the idea of treating this as a new work should be considered.  In FRBR 3.2.1, it says:  "By contrast, when the modification of a work involves a significant degree of independent intellectual or artistic effort, the result is viewed, for the purpose of this study, as a new work. Thus paraphrases, rewritings, adaptations for children, parodies, musical variations on a theme and free transcriptions of a musical composition are considered to represent new works."

It doesn't seem to me that the authors of this new edition would think of it as being the same work as the previous edition.  The title alone seems to be a strong indicator of that!

FRBR doesn't have one-size-fits-all definitions for work and expression.  Both of those are abstract concepts, and placing something into one or the other of those boxes depends on lots of different things, including the cultural and technological contexts in which the metadata will be used.  The word "edition" can mean many things besides "this is another expression of the same work that another edition is".

What's important is relating the different editions to each other, and that doesn't depend on them being expressions of one common work.  It depends on identifying and recording the relationships between the editions.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
[log in to unmask]
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yan Liao
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 12:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Is this a new expression or new work
> 
> Thank you all for the input. I agree that it makes more sense to be
> cataloged as new expression.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 1:20 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Is this a new expression or new work
> 
> Since the other two names are the same as the earlier editions, I would
> say that Batman's name is shown as being the principal person
> responsible for the new expression, rather than a new work.  So the work
> (100/240) would be named using Wren's authorized access point in
> combination with a 240 of "Of counsel agreement" even though Batman's
> name is prominent and listed first.
> 
> Adam Schiff
> 
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Yan Liao wrote:
> 
> > Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 15:03:53 +0000
> > From: Yan Liao <[log in to unmask]>
> > Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Is this a new expression or new work
> >
> > Adam, sorry for the confusion.
> >
> > All the previous editions (1991, 1998, 2005), only 2 authors are listed
> Harold G Wren (first named author) and Beverly J. Glascock.
> >
> > In the 4th edition (2013), a new author Jean L. Batman is listed as first
> named author. In addition, her name is listed with bigger font than the
> other 2 authors on the title page (According to AACR2 21.6, seems the
> principle responsibility is indicated by the layout of the chief source of
> info. However, seems no similar rules in RDA)
> >
> > In addition, all the previous editions have titles "The of counsel
> agreement". The 4th edition changes the title to be "Of counsel".
> >
> > According to LC training document, if the author of the
> original/previous edition is still listed in the current edition, it may be
> treated as a new expression. However, in this particular case, because of
> the indication of the principle responsibility on the title page and the title
> change, I feel little bit confused.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 3:47 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Is this a new expression or new work
> >
> > I'm not sure you provided us with enough information.  Are all of the
> authors named in the 4th edition new or are some of them a carryover
> from the 3rd edition?  If all new, then I think for sure you have a new
> work.  To link them I would use a sequential linking field with the
> relationship designator "supersedes", since this work supersedes the
> previous one.  According to LC training materials, no 700 added entry
> would be made for the earlier work, although you could use the
> designator "Supersedes:" with a work access point in a 700 I suppose.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Aug 2013, Yan Liao wrote:
> >
> >> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 21:00:32 +0000
> >> From: Yan Liao <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
> <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >> Subject: Is this a new expression or new work
> >>
> >> Dear Colleagues,
> >>
> >> We are cataloging one book: Of counsel (4th edition). On the title
> page, Jean L. Batman is listed as the first named author with bigger font
> than the other 2 authors, Harold G. Wren and Beverly J. Glascock. The
> previous 3 editions are under the title "The of counsel agreement" and
> the first named author is  Harold G. Wren.
> >>
> >> In the preface to the fourth edition, the author Jean L. Batman said
> "Although I agree with the authors of previous editions that a well-
> drafted 'Of Counsel' agreement is indispensable for lawyer or law firms...
> only about half the 'Of Counsel' attorneys I interviewed for this fourth
> edition had written 'Of Counsel' agreements. For this reason, and because
> this book goes well beyond contract considerations, the title for this
> edition has been abbreviated to simply 'Of Counsel'."
> >>
> >> Here are my questions
> >>
> >> 1.       should this edition be cataloged as a new expression or new
> work? (I personally lean toward new work based on the author name
> change and title change)
> >>
> >> 2.       If it's cataloged as new work, how should this be connected with
> the previous edition as related work? Should 775 be used or use 700
> Name/Title (Wren, Harold G|t Of counsel agreement)?
> >>
> >> 3.       If it should be cataloged as new expression, I think it should be
> 100 Wren, Harold G. 240 Of counsel agreement with optional 775 to the
> previous edition?
> >>
> >> Thanks for any help.
> >>
> >> Clara
> >>
> >>
> >> ______________________________________
> >> Yan Liao (Clara)
> >> Head of Cataloging
> >> Georgetown University Law Library
> >> 111 G Street, N.W.
> >> Washington DC 20001
> >> Phone: (202)662-9190
> >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Adam L. Schiff
> > Principal Cataloger
> > University of Washington Libraries
> > Box 352900
> > Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> > (206) 543-8409
> > (206) 685-8782 fax
> > [log in to unmask]
> > http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Adam L. Schiff
> Principal Cataloger
> University of Washington Libraries
> Box 352900
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> (206) 543-8409
> (206) 685-8782 fax
> [log in to unmask]
> http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~