Print

Print


The linked fields are incredibly superior since they “should” include imprint data, edition statements, ISBN and LCCN (at least at LC), as well as very meaningful relationship indicators (which will get even better after we’ve had a few generations to refine them).  Unfortunately, those designing cataloging rules and communications formats haven’t always been so good at communicating with those designing the ILS’s and OPAC’s of this world, so, using LC as an example, the linked fields are only searchable with keyword searches.  I predict that once the ILS’s and OPAC’s “catch up”, we’ll never make title added entries (usually author-title added entries) in the 700-740 fields, for anything that can be put in a 760-787 linked field. Unfortunately, I’ll be retired before that happens.

Aaron Kuperman, LC Law Cataloging Section.
This is not an official communication from my employer


==========