Print

Print


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Arakawa, Steven
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 11:30 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Punctuation used with $3 and $x in 260, 490, 8XX
> Fields: PCC guidelines
> 
> I think an example for handling multipart monographs would be helpful here.
> Unlike serials, multipart descriptive cataloging includes the publication
> date(s) in 260 subfield c, so simply recording volume numbers is not helpful,
> especially since the $c is not repeatable in the subsequent 260 fields e.g.
> 
> 260 __ ‡3 v. 1: ‡a Darmstadt : ‡b Primus, ‡c c2007-2009.
> 260 3_ ‡3 v. 2: ‡a Münster : ‡b Lit
> 
> Multiparts are frequently published out of volume order, so one can't infer
> when v.1 and v.2 were issued.
> 
> Prefer (if published in volume order):
> 
> 260 __ ‡3 v. 1 (c2007): ‡a Darmstadt : ‡b Primus, ‡c c2007-2009.
> 260 3_ ‡3 v. 2 (2009): ‡a Münster : ‡b Lit
> 
> (if published out of volume order):
> 
> 260 __ ‡3 v. 2 (c2007): ‡a Darmstadt : ‡b Primus, ‡c c2007-2009.
> 260 3_ ‡3 v. 1 (2009): ‡a Münster : ‡b Lit

Would it be simpler just to give $3 in the fields for the exceptions to the first 260?  Personally, I really dislike using $3 in 260 ##, because it is illogical on its face.  Building on Steven's example above, I would prefer something like:

	260 ## $a Darmstadt : $b Primus, $c c2007-2009.
	260 3# $3 v. 1 (2009): $a Münster : $b Lit

In regard to *what* details to record in $3, I think it should be whatever makes the situation most clear.  I like Steven's approach.  An alternative, although not quite as clear, would be something like:

	260 3# $3 vol. published 2009: $a Münster : $b Lit

But that might look better when used for something with a longer run, e.g.:

	260 3# $3 vols. published 2001-<2009>: $a Paris : $b Hachette

> Also, the indicator 3 (current publisher) seems to make more sense for
> serials; when the set is complete there really is no "current" publisher (v.
> 2 could be out of print for all we know). Wouldn't it be better to leave
> indicator as blank in such cases?

Indicator "3" is named "Current/latest publisher", so I think it's the appropriate one to use.  ("Latest" is what "current" turns into when it's no longer current but there's nothing later.)

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Bibliographic Services Dept.
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345