It hasn't been rescinded. However, I'm pretty sure that the Library of Congress has not yet implemented that MARC 21 update. Therefore, neither has PCC.

The same applies to the use of 046 $q and $r, and the changes in meaning of 046 $s and $t. These aren't yet implemented by PCC either.


Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
E-mail: [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: 06 October 2016 16:01
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Conference held at sea

Here's a related question on multiple locations of a meeting.

Supposedly, multiple locations can be recorded as follows in MARC (Example 3):

$c - Location of meeting
Place name or a name of an institution where a meeting was held. Multiple adjacent locations are contained in a repeatable subfield $c.

111     2#$aWorkshop on Primary Health Care$d(1983 :$cKavieng, Papua New Guinea)
111     2#$aConference on Philosophy and Its History$d(1983 :$cUniversity of Lancaster)
111     2#$aWorld Peace Conference$n(1st :$d1949 :$cParis, France; $cPrague, Czechoslovakia)

But OCLC does not accept this in production mode. An error message pops up, if it detects more than one $c in 111. I wrote to OCLC about this a while ago to no avail (no word from them, no rectification). As it is, we are "forced" to record multiple locations by using only one $c, for example, $c Paris, France ; Prague, Czechoslovakia. I have seen such practices from LC and other institutions (interestingly, some catalogers put a space before the semicolon, while others don't). At any rate, does anyone know if the decision (made in 2014 to make $c repeatable in 111) has already been rescinded?

Western Languages Cataloging Team
Princeton University Library

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 2:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Conference held at sea

If the name of the ship were known it would be your best option.

But once we're into the sub-optimal: given the fact that the banner you linked to reads, "9th Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems, September 20-27, 2014, Venice-Istanbul", I think you are on safe ground to record the ports of call as locations associated with the conference, per ES, which would likely result in an access point that looked something like this:

Conference on Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environmental Systems (9th : 2014 : Venice, Italy and Istanbul, Turkey)

Doubtless you are correct the conference actually took place on the line described by these two points, but I think it's accurate enough that a researcher looking to identify the conference would understand what is meant.

And while I'm not sure you can use a non-jurisdictional term (it certainly strikes me as novel) in this case "Mediterranean Sea" would be less specific.

(Of course, to further complicate matters, it seems the conference actually began at a third location, Dubrovnik. And indeed it could also be recorded as a place associated with the conference... but once you get around to using three locations in an access point things can get kind of messy: "Dubrovnik, Croatia, Venice, Italy and Istanbul, Turkey.")

My .02,

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Finnerty, Ryan
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2016 9:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Conference held at sea

Hello PCCList,

We are trying to make an authority record for the 9th instance of this conference:

The conference was held at sea on a ship going from Venice to Istanbul.

What would you put for the location of the conference?

I'm leaning towards using Mediterranean Sea but I don't know if that would be allowable. All the examples for conference locations in RDA are jurisdictions.  I don't want to use Venice and Istanbul since it wasn't actually held in those places.

We don't have the name of the ship, but if we did, could you use the name of the ship for an "associated institution"?

Or would you just omit this element altogether?

Thanks for your help,

Ryan J. Finnerty
Head, Database and Authorities Management | NACO Coordinator UC San Diego Library | Metadata Services [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | (858) 822-3138

Experience the British Library online at<>
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts :<>
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book.<>
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
Think before you print