I think putting the date in parentheses in this case would be a very good idea.

Pete Wilson

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kevin M Randall
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 2:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] use of field 240

Perhaps the year should be put into subfield $k instead of $f:

Edwards, Jonathan, $d 1703-1758. $t Works. $k Selections (2013)

This helps clarify that the date 2013 is an element relating to the work, not to an expression.  Unfortunately MARC only has an element called "Date of work", not also one called "Date of expression".  In the definition of subfield $f is this:  "Date added parenthetically to a title to distinguish between identical titles entered under the same name is not separately subfield coded."  The references to RDA 6.4 and 6.10 for this MARC element in Cataloger's Desktop indicate that despite the definition of the element, it's really used for both works and expressions...

(Of course, this would be less of a problem if we stopped subscribing to the erroneous belief that RDA actually calls for using this kind of CCT in the case of a compilation bearing its own title.)

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

And to provide a "course correction" to remedy the defects that Pete identifies, namely --

"Most importantly, I don't believe this:
Edwards, Jonathan, $d 1703-1758. $t Works. $k Selections. $f 2013
is an expression of:
Edwards, Jonathan, $d 1703-1758. $t Works. $k Selections"

-- I'd also appreciate other perspectives.  How would you best individuate the particular work that comprises this specific anthology of writings?

Sincerely - Ian

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