This raises an interesting question. According to RDA 22.214.171.124, the AAP for a work should not conflict with one that represents an agent or a place, but what about a subject? I thought I read someplace that subject headings were part of the universe we should consider, but if so, the PS would be the place to put it.
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917
This is just a quick follow-up on a related issue.
Time [Title, without qualifier] is in NAF [http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n94056291.html], but the term is identical to Time [Topic]. Could someone tell me how to refine my search on Time [Title] as a subject in OCLC?
I also tried “searchFAST.” By typing “time title” in the full heading search box, at least I got to know that there are 161 usages in World Cat (2016) and 10 usages in LC (2016) with Time (Title) as subject. But that was the end of it. I was unable to go further.
Thanks in advance!
Agreed, unless the content is different, this is not a different expression, just a manifestation difference.
University of Washington Libraries
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>
on behalf of Deborah J. Leslie <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 10:22:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: work (qualifier), etc.
In the absence of other compelling evidence, I would consider "collector's edition" to be manifestation-level, not expression-level, and so not appropriate for the AAP.
Deborah J. Leslie | Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] |
Under the title “Hillary : an American life” there are two separate bib records in OCLC ($b eng $e rda): (OCoLC)860755500 and (OCoLC)919007514. They seem to be the same work to me. One key difference, however, is the added edition statement (250 “Hardcover collector’s edition”) in the second bib. I wonder if the same statement is also in the first publication. If so, then, obviously the two records should be merged. But I could be wrong. What if the person/institution who contributed the second bib to OCLC had both editions and found the additional “Hardcover collector’s edition” in the second piece?
A more conspicuous difference is the presence of “130 0 Hillary (Time Books (Firm))” in the second record, which, I believe, was correctly formulated and assigned to the work (not yet in NAF, though), seeing that there are quite a few different works entered under the single title “Hillary” in OCLC.
Now, if indeed there two different editions, I think that both bib records should have “130 0 Hillary (Time Books (Firm)),” period. But if one really thinks there’s a need to distinguish the two (seemingly, the basis of justification for creating the 2nd bib), then s/he could do the following (by adding a work AAP to the first bib and giving an expression AAP to the second):
130 0 Hillary (Time Books (Firm))
130 0 Hillary (Time Books (Firm)) $s (Collector’s edition)
Your comments are most welcome!