From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Michael Borries [[log in to unmask]]
> Why should the cataloger have used the 240 at all in the case below? I don't
> see a uniform title, only a variant title, which should have been recorded in a
> 246, not a 700 author title added entry.
The record Ian posted describes a revised edition of an earlier publication (from a 500 note: "Revision of a document originally published in 1984 by Fourth Internationalist Tendency"). OCLC #39550755, a record for that 1984 publication, has this 245 title: "Leon Trotsky & the organizational principles of the Revolutionary Party." I suspect the original cataloger followed the AACR2 practice of posting an added entry with the earlier edition's (ever so slightly varied) title rather than using the 100/240 as a means of grouping the expressions of this work together.
Mark K. Ehlert
University of St. Thomas