I was looking through some PCC policy statements and I found this to be of interest: PCC policy statement for 184.108.40.206 instructs the application of the alternative, which is to “omit initial articles unless a title for work is to be accessed under that article.”
To the best of my knowledge, I do not recall ever seeing a PCC record which did not include an initial article in the 245 field. I’m quite certain this must only be referencing the 240 field, in which case perhaps the policy statement of LAC “omit initial articles when recording the preferred title for the work in an authorized access point” would be a better way to communicate the information (and would be in line with current practice).
Am I completely off base and have I been wrongly including articles in records all this time, or do we just need to word this statement in a less confusing way? Or does our coding the articles as non-filing characters fulfill the directions? Given that examples in other policy statements (for example, the policy statement for 220.127.116.11, but I have seen others) include an article within the filing characters, there seems to be a bit of confusion here.
Assistant Professor and Monographic Cataloger
P.O. Box 5408
Mississippi State, MS 39762
[log in to unmask]" alt="http://opa.msstate.edu/identity/images/msstate_sig.png" style="width:3.6458in; height:.625in">