I just noticed that, in authority records, when there is a cross reference from a geographic name in direct order to a geographic name as part of a larger entity, the coding changes from X51 to X10. For instance, in NAR n 95077253, “Midtown Manhattan (New York, N.Y.)” is coded as a 151, but “New York (N.Y.). $b Midtown Manhattan” is coded as a 410. Now, of course, a 451 as currently defined could not take a subfield $b, but it could take a subfield $z, which would seem to make more sense in this case in any event.
It does make some difference in searching in that “sca gg: New York (N.Y.). Midtown Manhattan” will produce no results. A keyword search will produce results from the other fields, of course.
This is probably moot with the advent of BibFrame, but the principles are still the same. For unincorporated geographic areas, it would seem to have made more sense to use X51 and a subfield $z. Any thoughts?
Michael S. Borries
Cataloger, City University of New York
151 East 25th Street, 5th Floor
New York, NY 10010
Phone: (646) 312-1687
Email: [log in to unmask]