Print

Print


I think continued use of the 240 is justified, based on LC-PCC PS for 6.2.2.10.3:

"Instead of recording the preferred title for each of the works in the compilation, record a conventional collective title followed by "Selections." Give an authorized access point for the first or predominant work".

Christopher Thomas | Electronic Resources and Metadata Librarian
(949) 824-7681 | fax (949) 824-6700 | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Law Library * University of California * Irvine
www.law.uci.edu.library<http://www.law.uci.edu.library/>


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ian Fairclough
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 2:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] use of field 240

Dear PCCLIST readers,

Perhaps someone would kindly comment on whether (and if so, why) to continue to use field 240 for a title such as "Poems. Selections" rather than having a pair of 700 fields, one for the work and one for the expression.  I would be very grateful for opinions on this matter, even more so for documentation on practice.

Sincerely - Ian

Ian Fairclough
Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian
George Mason University
703-993-2938
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>