>Strictly speaking, UKMARC 248 was the equivalent of MARC21 245 $n and $p. 

Rose-Ann, perhaps I should have said *repeating* 248; 700$a$t's based
on 505 just do not index well in many ILS.   Repeating 248 would be
such a neat solution for title access to part titles.  Some resort to
740s in addition to the 700$a$t.  We omit the 700 if it repeats the
100, due to complaints about duplicate author entries, but that is not
what the rule would have us do.  The same complaints are made about
800 series; the 800 repeats the 100, resulting in two hits for the
same physical item in an author search.

An advantage of 248 over 245 $n$p and 700$a$t, other than direct title
access, is that it has a filing indicator.

Our last UKMARC client just ceased receiving UKMARC.  We are sorry to
see some of its ideas vanish (along with WLN quality controlled
records and UTLAS innovations).

It will be interesting to see what Bibframe comes up with for parts,
and regarding MARC author entry redundancies.


   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________