Print

Print


I am following this discussion with great interest because I wonder how all of this plays out for the users.  If I search Lee, Laurie in the catalog, how many entries will be retrieved, and how many bibliographic resources are there really available?  If we have 4 access points for one creator, artist, etc. and only one book, how does that impact the user?

Christina Bellinger

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McDonald, Stephen
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:16 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] MARC fields doing double duty - a case

 

My understanding is that you may not add a relator to an author in an author-title entry; if you wanted to bring out the relationship of that author to the work in hand, you would have to add a separate entry for the author, with the optional relator.  An access point for a work or expression is constructed from the author and the title, and does not include any relator code for the author.  As it is, that entry is an access point only for the work/expression represented by the author-title, and is not specifically relating the author Laurie Lee to the work in hand.

 

Since subfield e is repeatable, I might do:

 

7001 Lee, Laurie, ǂe artist, ǂe author.

70012Lee, Laurie. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

 

                                                                           Steve McDonald

                                                                           [log in to unmask]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 10:25 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] MARC fields doing double duty - a case

 

PCCLIST readers,

 

At my desk: Laurie Lee :  a folio /  by Jessy Lee.  OCLC 870426566 

 

In this book the late English celebrity Laurie Lee, who is best known as an author, has an anthology of paintings, drawings and poems, compiled by his daughter Jessy, who wrote the extensive biographical commentary (and has been given main entry).   This additional field was present:

70012Lee, Laurie. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

 

It appears that the existing field is doing double duty.  Presumably, catalogers considered the entry for the work/expression, whichever it is (it looks like it covers both) to be adequate.  But no relationship designator was present. 

 

Would you edit the existing field to include one?  Thus:

70012Lee, Laurie, ǂe artist. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

 

Or would you add a field, thus:

7001 Lee, Laurie, ǂe artist.

70012Lee, Laurie. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

 

Furthermore: the book consists not only of art works but textual ones.  To provide a relationship designator for the text, would you put:

 

70012Lee, Laurie, ǂe artist, ǂe author. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

or

7001 Lee, Laurie, ǂe artist.

7001 Lee, Laurie, ǂe author.

70012Lee, Laurie. ǂt Works. ǂk Selections.

 

Sincerely - Ian

 

Ian Fairclough

Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian

George Mason University

703-993-2938

[log in to unmask]