Ian Fairclough <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks to Andrea Cawelti for the reference to the Music Library Association document http://bcc.musiclibraryassoc.org/BCC-Historical/BCC2014/RDA%20Best%20Practices%20for%20Music%20Cataloging_v101.pdf ...


The first time I looked at this example, I saw that the person in field 100 is the composer.  But no subfield e composer is present.  I wondered whether a second field with the same heading, with |e composer, would be present (it would have to be tagged 700).

Since this is a text-only work/expression, the composer role would apply to the related musical work.  That (ideally) is covered by the record for the musical.  But bib records can be a tangle of relationships sometimes two or three steps removed from the item being described...


There's a 700 field for that heading with subfield i containing the relator term Libretto for (work).  But I don't understand that field, because the term libretto is also in parentheses following the title in subfield t.  (A libretto for a libretto? That's how it reads to me.)

Yes, this looks like an error to me too--the parenthetical qualifiers in the 240 and that 700 should be flipped around at the very least.

I'll leave the question of librettist vs. lyricist as main entry to someone else.  Though in the 245 $c of that sample record, I do note a "conceived by" credit for the composer-lyricist.

Mark K. Ehlert                 Minitex
Coordinator                    University of Minnesota
Digitization, Cataloging &     15 Andersen Library
  Metadata Education (DCME)    222 21st Avenue South
Phone: 612-624-0805            Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439

  "Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by
the swift course of time." -- Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen
of Verona," Act I, scene iii