You’re right—that does seem odd.
But the same point, without reference to musical works, is covered by the RDA instruction 126.96.36.199, in the Elizabeth Barrett Browning example.
This situation certainly comes up frequently in musical works—maybe the PS was meant as a bonus hint to music catalogers?
I wonder why the PS mentions musical works. There doesn’t seem to be any reason for such a restriction.
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
I would agree. LC PCC-PS 188.8.131.52 seems to apply here, which recommends adding “(Compilation)” to the VAP.
Opinions are my own and not my employer’s,
Music Division, Library of Congress
[log in to unmask]" alt="http://staff.loc.gov/sites/librarylink/files/2018/08/Email-LOC-logo.jpg">
I’m curious about the recent addition by DLC of a 400 to the authority record (n 2016068853) for:
Watts, Isaac, $d 1674-1748. $t Divine songs. $k Selections
The 400 is:
Watts, Isaac, $d 1674-1748. $t Cradle hymn
Now, though I’m no expert, it looks to me like “Cradle hymn” is just one poetic work. So I don’t think this cross reference makes sense.
The citation given for the work this 400 is based on has the date 1830. A book published with this date (LCCN 23018994) has this title/subtitle: “The cradle hymn : with the morning and evening hymns.” So that book probably really does merit the “selections” CCT, but to use its title alone in a name-title cross reference on the authority record looks wrong to me.
Should the title portion of the 400 be changed? Perhaps to: Cradle hymn (Compilation)?
These kinds of problems seem to crop up an awful lot.