[All previous stuff snipped]

I’ve not gone through the series bridge training yet, so not operating from a full understanding of RDA series work.  I’d like to get the take of the CW on what happens in two situations.

First, when the contents of a set (music catalogers work with them a lot, of course, because of critical editions of composers’ works) are republished, but physically organized and numbered in a fashion different from the original.  One example that I established under AACR2 is represented by the pair of SARs no2003099902 and no2003094696.  As I recall, the republished volumes contain the original series statement and numbering, so the bibliographic records for the republication contained two series statements and tracings.

Perhaps a more straight-ahead thing to ask about is a republication that imposes numbering on a series originally published as unnumbered.  SARs no2004032950 and no2004034697 represent this (and may betray an error on my part in having qualified both series; I think the standard practice would have been to leave the original unqualified).

Mark Scharff, Music Cataloger
Gaylord Music Library
Washington University in St. Louis
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>