From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Borries Sent: Monday, March 20, 2017 1:24 PM > > I know I should know this, so apologize for taking up people's time, but is it > considered best practice now to use relators in MARC 500 fields, rather than > the field by itself, or is this a matter of cataloger's judgment?� I don't recall > seeing a policy statement here, but since I am something of a "jack-of-all-trades" > here, I often miss things, and I seem to see records done both ways. According to DCM Z1, 5XX See Also From Tracing - General Information: "LC/PCC catalogers applying RDA instructions may use subfield $i in conjunction with subfield $w code 'r' for relationship designators. When applying RDA relationship designators in 5XXs, supply terms from Appendix I, J or K; capitalize the initial letter of the term and follow the term with a colon. "Until a decision is reached by the PCC Policy Committee on the use of relationship designators in authority records, LC/PCC catalogers may continue to use the subfield $w codes "a" (earlier) and "b" (later) or optionally use the appropriate relationship designators from Appendix K to provide relationship links between corporate entities (510 or 511)." http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/dcmz1.pdf#page=91 -- Mark K. Ehlert � � � � � � � O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library Cataloging and Metadata University of St. Thomas � Librarian � �2115 Summit Avenue Phone: 651-962-5488 St. Paul, MN 55105 <http://www.stthomas.edu/libraries/> � "Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by the swift course of time"--Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen of Verona," Act I, Scene iii