Print

Print


Good point! Thanks for uncovering the theoretical underpinnings! For what it’s worth in practical terms (e.g., to prevent interfiling in NAF, wrong subject assignment, incorrect “identifier” assignment [$0], etc. ), it would be advisable to add a qualifier to a “uniform” title that is identical or very similar to an LC subject heading.

 

Compare: Digital communications [Topic] and Digital communication [Title]. In OCLC, there are 169 bib records that have “Digital communication” as subject. Multiply them by the number of holding institutions, the impact could be staggering. What if some agencies attach incorrect “identifiers” to them? And what if they reload the records back to OCLC?

 

Yang

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hostage, John
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:31 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] work (qualifier), etc.

 

This raises an interesting question. According to RDA 6.27.1.9, 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.

 

------------------------------------------

John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services

Langdell Hall 194

Harvard Law School Library

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 12:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] work (qualifier), etc.

 

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!

 

Yang

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2018 1:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] work (qualifier), etc.

 

Agreed, unless the content is different, this is not a different expression, just a manifestation difference.

 

Adam Schiff

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] |

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Yang Wang
Sent: Monday, 29 January, 2018 12:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] work (qualifier), etc.

 

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!

 

Yang