Bibliographic and Authority record examples of cataloging (cataloguing) with Resource Description and Access (RDA), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), MARC 21, BIBFRAME (Bibliographic Framework), Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2), ISBD, MODS, Dublin Core, etc.
Contents
- Featured Library Cataloging Example
- Cataloging and Metadata Terminology
- Cataloging Examples of Bibliographic and Authority Records
- Cataloging Example of a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC
- Cataloging Examples of Relationship Designators in Authority Records
- MARC Bibliographic and RDA Rules Instructions and Examples
- MARC Authority and RDA Rules Instructions and Examples
- FAQ on Authorized Access Points for Collections of the Works of Individual Agents and Works of Unknown Responsibility that Purport to be by an Individual Agent
- Subject Cataloging Examples
- Cataloging News and Updates
- References
Note
- This article can be viewed best on a desktop or a laptop.
- This list of cataloging examples is under development. Gradually we will be adding new examples to this collection.
Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
FEATURED LIBRARY CATALOGING EXAMPLE
Cataloging Example of a monograph/book/volume/text: RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC, MODS, ISBD
Survey of Emerging Cataloging Practices : Use of RDA by Academic Libraries / by Salman Haider & Primary Research Group Staff. - New York : Primary Research Group, 2016. (111 pages ; 28 cm.). ISBN: 9781574403831.
Screenshots of Catalog Records
OCLC WorldCat
British Library
Library of Congress
Library of Congress - MODS Record
University of Chicago
Harvard University
New York Public Library, New York, United States
CATALOGING AND METADATA TERMINOLOGY
Some important cataloging and metadata terms are described in brief below. These are taken from the Glossary of Library and Information Science. Visit the glossary to get the links and description of the original articles and also to see other terms required for a better understanding of cataloguing.
Access Point - Access Point refers to a name, term, code, heading, word, phrase etc., a unit of information representing a specific entity that can serve as a search key in information retrieval, under which a library catalog or bibliographic database may be searched and library materials may be identified and retrieved. In a catalog, index, or other organized systems some examples of access points are, author, title, name (person, family, corporate body, etc.), subjects (topical, geographical, etc.), classification or call number, and codes such as ISBN, etc. which are chosen by the cataloger or indexer, when creating a bibliographic, authority, or metadata record (a surrogate), to enable the retrieval of the record. In modern cataloging using advanced Integrated Library Systems (ILS), the machine-readable cataloging, almost any portion of the catalog record can serve as an access point. The advanced search of the Online Public Access Catalogs provides many options as access points.
Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR, AACR2, AACR2R) - Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) is the essential international cataloguing code used for descriptive cataloging of various types of information resources by libraries in the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Australia as well as in many other countries. It was first developed in 1967 and updated regularly until 2005. The revisions and updates of the standard are referred to as AACR2. The second edition of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) is the most widely used cataloging code, designed for use in the construction of catalogs and other lists in general libraries of all sizes. AACR2 comprise a detailed set of rules and guidelines for producing metadata in a surrogate record to represent a library resource. The rules cover the standard description of areas like, the title, publisher, edition, series, etc., as well as the provision of choice and form of access points (headings) for all materials which a library may hold or to which it may have access, including books, serials, cartographic materials, electronic resources, etc. AACR also provides rules for the formulation of standard forms of names and titles to provide access to and grouping of those descriptions. AACR2 standardized cataloging and ensured consistency within the catalog and between the catalogs of libraries using the same code in describing the physical attributes of library materials identically. AACR marked a shift from the previous cataloging rules, which were criticized for being too detailed, complex, and mere compilations of rules to handle specific bibliographic cases. Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules are considered as the most important advances in English-language codes for descriptive cataloging during the twentieth century.
Authority Record - Authority Record is a record which gives the authoritative form (the form selected for a heading) of a personal name, corporate name, family name, place name, uniform or preferred title, series title, subject, etc. in the library catalog or the file of bibliographic records, and are listed in an authority file containing headings of library items. To ensure consistency, an authority record is created for each authorized heading (authorized access point) for a proper name or a subject, etc. An authority record is made when a heading is established, i.e., authorized for use as the main entry (preferred title and, if appropriate, the authorized access point for the creator), an added entry, or subject entry, for the first time, while cataloging of a library item. Authority record may be in a printed or machine-readable form.
BIBFRAME - BIBFRAME (Bibliographic Framework) is a data model for bibliographic description. BIBFRAME was designed to replace the MARC standards, and to use linked data principles to make bibliographic data more useful both within and outside the library community. The MARC Standards, which BIBFRAME seeks to replace, were developed by Henriette Avram at the US Library of Congress during the 1960s. By 1971, MARC formats had become the national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data in the United States, and the international standard by 1973. In a provocatively titled 2002 article, library technologist Roy Tennant argued that "MARC Must Die", noting that the standard was old; used only within the library community; and designed to be a display, rather than a storage or retrieval format. A 2008 report from the Library of Congress wrote that MARC is "based on forty-year-old techniques for data management and is out of step with programming styles of today." In 2012, the Library of Congress announced that it had contracted with Zepheira, a data management company, to develop a linked data alternative to MARC. Later that year, the library announced a new model called MARC Resources (MARCR). That November, the library released a more complete draft of the model, renamed BIBFRAME. The Library of Congress released version 2.0 of BIBFRAME in 2016.
Cataloging - Cataloging or Library Cataloging is the process of creating and maintaining bibliographic and authority records of the library catalog, the database of books, serials, sound recordings, moving images, cartographic materials, computer files, e-resources etc. that are owned by a library. The catalog may be in tangible form, such as a card catalog or in electronic form, such as online public access catalog (OPAC). The process of cataloging involves two major activities, viz. Descriptive Cataloging and Subject Cataloging. In Descriptive Cataloging, we describe details of library resources, such as the name of creator(s), contributor(s), titles, edition, publication, distribution, date, physical description, series etc. Two popular standards for Descriptive Cataloging are Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) and its successor Resource Description and Access (RDA). Subject cataloging involves subject analysis of the resource and assignment of classification numbers using schemes such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and providing subject headings using schemes such as Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH).
Descriptive Cataloging - Descriptive Cataloging includes recording the attributes of a library item, such as the name of author(s), contributor(s), title, edition, publisher, distributor, date, the number of pages, its size, name of series, etc. Descriptive Cataloging enables the user to find and identify a book, by the name of the author, the title, variant titles, etc. Two popular standards for Descriptive Cataloging are Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) and its successor Resource Description and Access (RDA).
Extended Date Time Format (EDTF) - The Extended Date/Time Format (EDTF) is a draft date-time standard initiated by the Library of Congress with the intention of creating more explicit date formatting and addressing date types that are not currently regulated by ISO 8601. The date time format ISO 8601 describes a number of date/time features, some of which are redundant and/or not very useful, on the other hand, there are a number of date and time format conventions in common use that are not included in ISO 8601. EDTF responds to a need for a date/time string more expressive than ISO 8601 can support. Current suggestions for additions are being noted and discussed within the EDTF community with the intention of formalizing the EDTF as an ISO 8601 amendment or as an extension to other Web-based date standards. EDTF defines features to be supported in a date/time string, features considered useful for a wide variety of applications.
Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) - Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR /ˈfɜːrbər/) is a conceptual entity-relationship model developed by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) that relates user tasks of retrieval and access in online library catalogs and bibliographic databases from a user’s perspective. It represents a more holistic approach to retrieval and access as the relationships between the entities provide links to navigate through the hierarchy of relationships. The model is significant because it is separate from specific cataloging standards such as Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) or International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD).
Library Classification - Classification or Library Classification or Book Classification or Bibliographic Classification is the process of arranging, grouping, coding, and organizing books and other library materials (e.g. serials, sound recordings, moving images, cartographic materials, manuscripts, computer files, e-resources etc.) on shelves or entries of a catalog, bibliography, and index according to their subject in a systematic, logical, and helpful order by way of assigning them call numbers using a library classification system, so that users can find them as quickly and easily as possible. Call number consists of a class number providing class designation, a book number providing author representation, and a collection number denoting the collection to which it belongs. In ordinary classification, we deal with the arrangement of ideas and the objects in a systematic order. But in library classification, we are concerned with documents, and the aim is to arrange these in the most helpful and permanent order. Similar to knowledge classification systems, bibliographic classification systems group entities that are similar and related together typically arranged in a hierarchical tree-type structure (assuming non-faceted system; a faceted classification system allows the assignment of multiple classifications to an object, enabling the classifications to be ordered in multiple ways).
Library of Congress Classification - The Library of Congress Classification (LCC) is a system of library classification developed by the Library of Congress. It was developed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to organize and arrange the book collections of the Library of Congress. Over the course of the twentieth century, the system was adopted for use by other libraries as well, especially large academic libraries in the United States. It is currently one of the most widely used library classification systems in the world. The Library's Policy and Standards Division maintains and develops the system. In recent decades, as the Library of Congress made its records available electronically through its online catalog, more libraries have adopted LCC for both subject cataloging as well as shelflisting. There are several classification schemes in use worldwide. Besides LCC, the other popular ones among them are Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC). Out of these, DDC and LCC are the classification systems which are most commonly used in libraries. The potential of Library of Congress Classification (LCC) system is yet to be explored in libraries. This article describes the various aspects of LCC and its suitability as a library classification system for classifying library resources. The Library of Congress was established in 1800 when the American legislatures were preparing to move from Philadelphia to the new capital city of Washington, D.C. Its earliest classification system was by size and, within each size group, by accession number. First recorded change in the arrangement of the collection appeared in the library’s third catalog, issued in 1808, which showed added categories for special bibliographic forms such as legal documents and executive papers. On the night of August 24, 1814, during the war of 1812, British soldiers set fire to the Capitol, and most of the Library of Congress’s collections were destroyed. Sometimes after, Thomas Jefferson offered to sell to Congress his personal library; subsequently, in 1815, the Congress purchased Jefferson’s personal library of 6,487 books. The books arrived already classified by Jefferson’s own system. The library adopted this system and used it with some modifications until the end of the nineteenth century. Library of Congress moved to a new building in 1897. By this time, the Library’s collection had grown to one and a half million volumes and it was decided that Jefferson’s classification system was no longer adequate for the collection. A more detailed classification scheme was required for such a huge and rapidly growing collection of documents. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Cutter’s Expansive Classification and the German Halle Schema were studied, but none was considered suitable. It was decided to construct a new system to be called the Library of Congress Classification (LCC). James C.M. Hanson, Head of the Catalog Division, and Charles Martel, Chief Classifier, were made responsible for developing the new scheme. Hanson and Martel concluded that the new classification should be based on Cutter’s Expansive Classification⁴ as a guide for the order of classes, but with a considerably modified notation. Work on the new classification began in 1901. The first outline of the Library of Congress Classification was published in 1904 by Charles Martel and J.C.M. Hanson – the two fathers of Library of Congress Classification. Class Z (Bibliography and Library Science) was chosen to be the first schedule to be developed. The next schedules, E-F (American history and geography), were developed. But E-F were the first schedules to be published, in 1901, followed by Z in 1902. Other schedules were progressively developed. Each schedule of LCC contains an entire class, a subclass, or a group of subclasses. The separate schedules were published in print volumes, as they were completed. All schedules were published by 1948, except the Class K (Law). The first Law schedule—the Law of United States, was published in 1969, and the last of the Law schedules to publish was KB—Religious law, which appeared in 2004. From the beginning, individual schedules of LCC have been developed and maintained by subject experts. Such experts continue to be responsible for additions and changes in LCC. The separate development of individual schedules meant that, unlike other classification systems, LCC was not the product of one mastermind; indeed, LCC has been called “a coordinated series of special classes”. Until the early 1990s, LCC schedules existed mainly as a print product. The conversion of LCC to machine-readable form began in 1993 and was completed in 1996. The conversion to electronic form was done using USMARC (now called MARC21) Classification Format. This was a very important development for LCC, as it enabled LCC to be consulted online and much more efficient production of the print schedules. In the year 2013, the Library of Congress announced a transition to online-only publication of its cataloging documentation, including the Library of Congress Classification. It was decided, the Library’s Cataloging Distribution Service (CDS) will no longer print new editions of its subject headings, classification schedules, and other cataloging publications. The Library decided to provide free downloadable PDF versions of LCC schedules. For users desiring enhanced functionality, the Library’s two web-based subscription services, Cataloger’s Desktop and Classification Web will continue as products from CDS. Classification Web is a web-based tool for LCC and LCSH. It supports searching and browsing of the LCC schedules and provides links to the respective tables to build the class numbers for library resources. LC has also developed training materials on the principles and practices of LCC and made those available for free on its website.
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) - Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is the list of headings produced from the subject authority file maintained by the United States Library of Congress for use in bibliographic records. It is popularly known by its abbreviation as LCSH and is sometimes used interchangeably with the phrase subject authority file. LCSH is a multidisciplinary vocabulary that includes headings in all subjects, from science to religion, to history, social science, education, literature, and philosophy. It also includes headings for geographic features, ethnic groups, historical events, building names, etc. Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is the most widely used subject vocabulary in the world. It is the model for many other vocabularies in English and other languages and has been translated into numerous languages. The strongest aspect of LCSH is that it represents subject headings of the Library of Congress, the national library of the United States, one of the richest of national libraries of the world. The administrative and managerial machinery of LC has made it possible for LCSH to stand out as an undisputed leader. LCSH is also used as indexing vocabulary in a number of published bibliographies. LCSH comprise a thesaurus or a controlled vocabulary of subject headings which is used by a cataloger or an indexer to assign subject headings to a bibliographic record to represent the subject of a work he/she is cataloging. LCSH contain the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) that are assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonym terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as the subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject. The fortieth edition of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH 40) contains headings established by the Library through January 2018. The headings included in this list were obtained by creating a file consisting of all subject heading and subdivision records in verified status in the subject authority file at the Library of Congress. There were 342,947 authority records in the file then. The subject authority database from which the headings in this edition were drawn indicates that the file contains approximately 24,390 personal name headings of which 23,272 represent family names, 10,034 corporate headings, 6 meeting or conference headings, 481 uniform titles, 242,511 topical subject headings, and 61,885 geographic subject headings. There are 764 general USE references, 4,351 general see also references, 299,751 references from one usable heading to another, and 362,646 references from unused terms to used headings. The creation and revision of subject headings is a continuous process. Approximately 5,000 new headings, including headings with subdivisions, are added to LCSH each year. Proposals for new headings and revisions to existing ones are submitted by catalogers at the Library of Congress and by participants in the Subject Authority Cooperative Program (SACO). More information on SACO may be found at <URL http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc>. Approved proposals become part of the online authority file of subject headings at the Library of Congress, from which various publications are created. Five services provide information about new and revised headings. First, a distribution service supplies the subject headings in the MARC 21 authorities format via Internet FTP on a weekly basis to supplement the master database file of subject authority records. Second, L.C. Subject Headings Monthly Lists are a timely source of information about new and changed subject headings, class numbers, references and scope notes. The lists are posted monthly to the World Wide Web at http://www.loc.gov/aba/cataloging/subject/weeklylists. Third, Classification Web provides World Wide Web access to Library of Congress Subject Headings and Library of Congress Classification to subscribers. Fourth, subject authority records are included in the Library’s Web authorities service and may be searched and viewed at http://authorities.loc.gov. Fifth, subject authorities are freely available for searching and download through the Library’s Linked Data Service at http://id.loc.gov.
MARC 21 - MARC (MAchine-Readable Cataloging) standards are a set of digital formats for the description of items catalogued by libraries, such as books. Working with the Library of Congress, American computer scientist Henriette Avram developed MARC in the 1960s to create records that could be read by computers and shared among libraries. By 1971, MARC formats had become the US national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data. Two years later, they became the international standard. There are several versions of MARC in use around the world, the most predominant being MARC 21, created in 1999 as a result of the harmonization of U.S. and Canadian MARC formats, and UNIMARC, widely used in Europe. The MARC 21 family of standards now includes formats for authority records, holdings records, classification schedules, and community information, in addition to the format for bibliographic records. MARC 21 was designed to redefine the original MARC record format for the 21st century and to make it more accessible to the international community. MARC 21 has formats for the following five types of data: Bibliographic Format, Authority Format, Holdings Format, Community Format, and Classification Data Format. Currently MARC 21 has been implemented successfully by The British Library, the European Institutions and the major library institutions in the United States, and Canada. MARC 21 is a result of the combination of the United States and Canadian MARC formats (USMARC and CAN/MARC). MARC21 is based on the NISO/ANSI standard Z39.2, which allows users of different software products to communicate with each other and to exchange data.
Resource Description and Access (RDA) - RDA stands for “Resource Description and Access” and is the title of the standard, that is the successor to AACR2. Resource Description and Access (RDA) is a standard for descriptive cataloging providing instructions and guidelines on formulating bibliographic data. Resource Description & Access (RDA) is a set of cataloging instructions based on FRBR and FRAD, for producing the description and name and title access points representing a resource. RDA offers libraries the potential to change significantly how bibliographic data is created and used. RDA is a standard for resource description and access designed for the digital world. It provides (i) A flexible framework for describing all resources (analog and digital) that is extensible for new types of material, (ii) Data that is readily adaptable to new and emerging database structures, (iii) Data that is compatible with existing records in online library catalogs. RDA is a package of data elements, guidelines, and instructions for creating library and cultural heritage resource metadata that are well-formed according to international models for user-focused linked data applications. RDA goes beyond earlier cataloging codes in that it provides guidelines on cataloging digital resources and places a stronger emphasis on helping users find, identify, select, and obtain the information they want. RDA also supports the clustering of bibliographic records in order to show relationships between works and their creators.
Statement of International Cataloguing Principles - The original Statement of Principles - commonly known as the “Paris Principles” - was approved by the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in 1961. Its goal of serving as a basis for international standardization in cataloguing has certainly been achieved: most of the cataloguing codes that were developed worldwide since that time have followed the Principles strictly or at least to a high degree. More than fifty years later, having a common set of international cataloguing principles is still necessary as cataloguers and users around the world use online catalogues as search and discovery systems. At the beginning of the 21st century, IFLA produced a new statement of principles (published in 2009) applicable to online library catalogues and beyond. The current version has been reviewed and updated in 2014 and 2015, and approved in 2016. The 2009 Statement of Principles replaced and explicitly broadened the scope of the Paris Principles from just textual resources to all types of resources, and from just the choice and form of entry to all aspects of bibliographic and authority data used in library catalogues. It included not only principles and objectives, but also guiding rules that should be included in cataloguing codes internationally, as well as guidance on search and retrieval capabilities. This 2016 edition takes into consideration new categories of users, the open access environment, the interoperability and the accessibility of data, features of discovery tools and the significant change of user behaviour in general.
Subject Cataloging - Subject Cataloging involves subject analysis of the resource and providing corresponding subject headings from a controlled vocabulary or subject heading list, such as Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Medical Subject Headings (MESH) and assignment of classification numbers using schemes such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). Subject Heading is defined as the most specific word or group of words that captures the essence of the subject or one of the subjects of a book or other library material which is selected from a subject heading list containing the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) and assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. Classification or Library Classification is the process of arranging, grouping, coding, and organizing books and other library materials on shelves or entries of a catalog, bibliography, and index according to their subject in a systematic, logical, and helpful order by way of assigning them call numbers using a library classification system, so that users can find them as quickly and easily as possible. Use of classification enables library users to browse on shelves to find its materials, determines the place of a book and the shelf, and also collocates additional items on the same or related subjects. Classification also enables the library users to find out what documents the library has on a certain subject. The cataloger assigns a classification, or call number, in correlation with the subject headings.
Subject Heading - Subject Heading is defined as the most specific word or group of words that captures the essence of the subject or one of the subjects of a book or other library material (e.g. serial, sound recording, moving image, cartographic material, manuscript, computer file, e-resource etc.) which is selected from a subject heading list containing the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) and assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. Subject headings are also used in a bibliography and index. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonyms terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as the subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. In short, vocabulary control helps in overcoming problems that occur due to the natural language of the document’s subject. Hence, if vocabulary control is not exercised different indexers or the same indexer might use different terms for the same concept on different occasions for indexing the documents dealing with the same subject and also use a different set of terms for representing the same subject at the time of searching. This, in turn, would result in ‘mis-match’ and thus affect information retrieval. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject. A subject heading may be subdivided by the addition of form subdivisions, geographical subdivisions, chronological subdivisions, and topical subdivisions to add greater specificity or add a parenthetical qualifier to add semantic clarification. Two popular subject heading lists are Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and Sears List of Subject Headings.
Subject Heading List - Subject Heading List is the printed or published list of subject headings which may be produced from the subject authority file maintained by an organization or individual. Subject heading list contain the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) that are assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonyms terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. In short, vocabulary control helps in overcoming problems that occur due to natural language of the document’s subject. Hence, if vocabulary control is not exercised different indexers or the same indexer might use different terms for the same concept on different occasions for indexing the documents dealing with the same subject and also use a different set of terms for representing the same subject at the time of searching. This, in turn, would result in ‘mis-match’ and thus affect information retrieval. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject.
Z39.50 - Z39.50 is a national and international standard defining a protocol for computer-to-computer information retrieval. It is a client-server, application layer communications protocol for searching and retrieving information from a database over a TCP/IP computer network. It is covered by ANSI/NISO standard Z39.50, and ISO standard 23950. The National Information Standards Organization of the United States (NISO) relating to libraries begin with Z39. To use Z39.50, you will need either special software or have an ILS with Z39.50 capabilities. Z39.50 acts like a “back door” into a library catalog. In order to download another library’s records, that library has to allow Z39.50 access to its catalog. If it does, though, there is no fee to pay the library providing the record.
Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, France [Photo credit: Vincent Desjardins/Wikipedia]
CATALOGING EXAMPLES OF BIBLIOGRAPHIC AND AUTHORITY RECORDS
Cataloging Example of a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC
Book title: Survey of Emerging Cataloging Practices: Use of RDA by Academic Libraries (coming soon)
Main article:
Cataloging Example for a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC
Book title: The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation¹
Main article: Owens book "The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation" wins ALCTS Outstanding Publication Award
CATALOGING EXAMPLES OF RELATIONSHIP DESIGNATORS AUTHORITY RECORDS
Examples of Relationship Designators in Authority Records²
Examples:
100 | 1 | Billequo, Nicolas, $d active 1540-1541 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Colleague: $a Colines, Simon de, $d 1480?-1546 | |
670 | Renouard, P. Répertoire des imprimeurs Parisiens, 1965: $b page 35 (Billequo (Nicolas); bookseller, active 1540-1541; address: Rue Moffetard, à Saint-Marcel; the four known volumes appearing under his name were printed by Simone de Colines) |
100 | 1 | Martin, George R. R. $t Sworn sword. $l Spanish | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Translator: $a Abascal, Jesús María | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Contained in (expression): $a Legends II (Anthology). $l Spanish | |
670 | Leyendas, 2006: $b table of contents (Canción de hielo y fuego, La espada leal, by George R.R. Martin) title page (translated by Jesús Abascal) |
Relationship Designators Only Used in 5XX Fields
Use relationship designators in 5XX fields only. When recording a relationship designator in 5XX field, record the designator using the $i and $w r technique (see DCM Z1, 5XX section).
Examples:
Agent to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Morrison, Jim, $d 1943-1971 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Colleague: $a Manzarek, Ray | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Corporate body: $a Doors (Musical group) | |
670 | Britannica Academic, viewed on April 13, 2017: $b Jim Morrison (member of the Doors along with Ray Mazarek) | ||
Agent to Agent | |||
110 | 2 | Wesleyan University (Middletown, Conn.). $b East Asia Studies Program | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Wesleyan University (Middletown, Conn.) | |
Relationship Designators Not Used Within Authorized Access Points
Do not interpose relationship designators within authorized access points recorded in 5XX fields.
Example:
500 | 1 | $w r $i Dramatized as (work): $a Asher, Sandy. $t Emma | |
NOT | |||
500 | 1 | $w r $i Dramatized as (work): $a Asher, Sandy, $e author. $t Emma | |
Relationships That Change Over Time
Most relationship designators are defined using the present tense, with the understanding that the designators can be used for relationships that took place in the past. Past and present relationships may be recorded in authority records at any time. If a relationship that no longer exists has been recorded in an authority record (e.g., because a person retired, or no longer holds a particular office), do not remove the relationship from the record.
Example:
Agent to Agent | |||
110 | 2 | Gianni Versace S.p.A. | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Chief executive: $a Versace, Santo, $d 1944- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Chief executive: $a Cacciatori, Fabio Massimo, $d 1961- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Chief executive: $a Di Risio, Giancarlo | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Chief executive: $a Ferraris, Gian Giacomo | |
Reflects a succession of CEOs of the company | |||
An affiliation can be recorded in the 373 field, with subfields $s and $t coding to show time period for which that affiliation existed (see DCM Z1, 373 section).
Example:
Agent to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Sanders, Bernard | |
373 | United States. Congress. House $2 naf $s 1991 $t 2007 | ||
373 | United States. Congress. Senate $2 naf $s 2007 | ||
510 | 1 | $w r $i Corporate body: $a United States. $b Congress. $b House | |
510 | 1 | $w r $i Corporate body: $a United States. $b Congress. $b Senate | |
Currently in United States Senate. Previously served in the United States House of Representatives. | |||
Specificity
When selecting a relationship designator, choose the most specific designator that is appropriate.
Examples:
Agent to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Tuckner, Paul | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Chief executive of: $a Grace Technology and Development (Firm) | |
NOT | |||
510 | 2 | $w r $i Officer of: $a Grace Technology and Development (Firm) | |
Tuckner‘s only position at Grace Technology and Development has been that of CEO | |||
Work to Work | |||
100 | 1 | Dear, Nick. $t Persuasion | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Television screenplay based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion | |
NOT | |||
500 | 1 | $w r $i Based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion | |
NOT | |||
500 | 1 | $w r $i Screenplay based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion | |
Multiple Relationships with the Same Entity
Sometimes an entity has more than one relationship to another entity. When recording multiple relationships, record them in separate 5XX fields, each with a single relationship designator in a single subfield $i.
Examples:
Agent to Agent | |||
110 | 2 | Council of American Survey Research Organizations | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Founding corporate body: $a Field Research Corporation | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Corporate member: $a Field Research Corporation | |
Expression to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Beowulf. $l English $s (Crawford) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Translator: $a Crawford, D. H. | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Editor: $a Crawford, D. H. | |
Work to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Speaking in tongues (Television program) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Television director: $a Browne, Christene, $d 1965- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Television producer: $a Browne, Christene, $d 1965- | |
Relationship That Is Unclear
Example:
Agent to Agent | |||
110 | 2 | Skidmore, Owings & Merrill | |
510 | 2 | Crosstown Associates | |
667 | Unable to determine nature of relationship with Crosstown Associates, n 87113575. | ||
For instructions on using simple see-also references and 667 notes when an earlier name has been resumed, see LC-PCC PS for 32.1.1.3, Early Name Resumed.
Relationship That Cannot Be Described Using a Relationship Designator
Examples:
Agent to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Wiggin, Ender $c (Fictitious character) | |
500 | 1 | Card, Orson Scott | |
678 | 0 | Ender Wiggin is the principal character in several novels and stories by Orson Scott Card, whose brilliant military strategy saves the human race from the attack of an alien race called the Formics. | |
Place to Place | |||
151 | Saint Barthelemy | ||
551 | France | ||
678 | 1 | Saint Barthelemy became an overseas collectivity of France in 2007. | |
Reciprocal Relationships
Example:
Person to Corporate Body | |||
100 | 1 | Warren, Whitney, $d 1864-1943 | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Founded corporate body of person: $a Warren & Wetmore | |
Reciprocal Relationship – Corporate Body to Person | |||
110 | 2 | Warren & Wetmore | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Founder: $a Wetmore, Charles D., $d 1867-1941 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Founder: $a Warren, Whitney, $d 1864-1943 | |
However, avoid recording reciprocal relationship links when there are potentially a large number of entities to be related.
Example:
Person to Corporate Body | |||
100 | 1 | Boxer, Barbara | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Corporate body: $a Democratic Party (U.S.) | |
Reciprocal relationship between Boxer and the Democratic Party would not be made in the record for Democratic Party (U.S.) because of the large number of members of the Democratic Party | |||
When relating agents and works, it is often sufficient to record the relationship only on the authority record for the work because agents may have relationships to many works.
Example:
Work to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Schindler’s list (Motion picture) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Film director: $a Spielberg, Steven, $d 1946- | |
Stephen Spielberg has directed and/or produced dozens of motion pictures. | |||
Real and Alternate Identities
See DCM Z1, 500 section, for instructions when only two name authority records are involved. See DCM Z1 663 section, when more than two name authority records are involved.
See also the FAQ - LC/PCC RDA Practice for Creating NARs for Persons Who Use Pseudonyms for treatment of the reciprocals.
Specific Cases
Corporate Bodies
Examples:
Predecessor | |||
110 | 2 | AcademiWales | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Predecessor: $a Public Service Management Wales (Program) | |
Reciprocal Relationship--Successor | |||
110 | 2 | Public Service Management Wales (Program) | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Successor: $a AcademiWales | |
Product of Split | |||
110 | 2 | Estes & Lauriat | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Product of split: $a Charles E. Lauriat Co. | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Product of split: $a Dana Estes & Company | |
Reciprocal Relationship—Predecessor of Split | |||
110 | 2 | Charles E. Lauriat Co. | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Predecessor of split: $a Estes & Lauriat | |
Reciprocal Relationship—Predecessor of Split | |||
110 | 2 | Dana Estes & Company | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Predecessor of split: $a Estes & Lauriat | |
Examples:
Existing NAR—Later Name | |||
110 | 2 | American Architectural Foundation | |
510 | 2 | $w a $a American Institute of Architects Foundation | |
Updated to Show Relationship Designator | |||
110 | 2 | American Architectural Foundation | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Predecessor: $a American Institute of Architects Foundation | |
Existing NAR—Earlier Name | |||
110 | 2 | American Institute of Architects Foundation | |
510 | 2 | $w b $a American Architectural Foundation | |
Updated to Show Relationship Designator | |||
110 | 2 | American Institute of Architects Foundation | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Successor: $a American Architectural Foundation | |
Examples:
110 | 2 | Field Research Corporation | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Founded corporate body of corporate body: $a Council of American Survey Research Organizations |
111 | 2 | World Conference on International Telecommunications $d (2012 : $c Dubai, United Arab Emirates) | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Sponsoring corporate body: $a International Telecommunication Union |
Hierarchical Relationships for Related Corporate Bodies
Examples:
110 | 2 | Sibley Music Library | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Eastman School of Music | |
The Eastman School of Music is the immediate superior body to Sibley Music Library. The superior body does not appear in the authorized access point. | |||
110 | 2 | British Broadcasting Corporation. $b Broadcasting Research Department | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a British Broadcasting Corporation | |
The British Broadcasting Corporation is the immediate superior body to Broadcasting Research Department. The superior body appears in the authorized access point. | |||
Example:
110 | 2 | Cooper-Hewitt Museum | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Smithsonian Institution | |
BUT NOT ALSO | |||
110 | 2 | Smithsonian Institution | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Hierarchical subordinate: $a Cooper-Hewitt Museum | |
Chronological relationships
Family Relationships
Use relationship designators from Appendix K.3.2 to relate families descended from other families.
Example:
Descendant Family of | |||
100 | 3 | Windsor (Royal house : $d 1918- : $c Great Britain) | |
500 | 3 | $w r $i Descendant family of: $a Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Royal house : $d 1840-1918 : $c Great Britain) | |
Reciprocal Relationship—Descendant Family | |||
100 | 3 | Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Royal house : $d 1840-1918 : $c Great Britain) | |
500 | 3 | $w r $i Descendant family: $a Windsor (Royal house : $d 1918- : $c Great Britain) | |
Use relationship designators from K.3 to record relationships between families and other types of agents.
Example:
100 | 1 | Benson, Phoebe, $d 1820-1904 | |
500 | 3 | $w r $i Descendants: $a Benson (Family : $d 1844- : $g Benson, Richard, 1816-1895) |
If there is no appropriate relationship designator, use simple see-also references (see Guideline 7).
Works and Expressions
Works and Expressions
Relating Works and Expressions to Agents
Examples: Work to Creator(s)
Work to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Return of the king | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Author: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973 | |
Relationship between a work and its creator. | |||
Work to Agent | |||
100 | 0 | Christo, $d 1935- $t Wrapped Reichstag | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Artist: $a Jeanne-Claude, $d 1935-2009 | |
500 | 0 | $w r $i Artist: $a Christo, $d 1935 | |
Collaborative work created by Christo and Jeanne-Claude. | |||
Examples: Work to Other Associated Agent
Work to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Studies in economics (Eugene, Or.) | |
510 | 2 | $w r $i Issuing body: $a University of Oregon. $b Bureau of Business and Economic Research | |
Relationships between expressions and agents may also be recorded using an appropriate relationship designator from RDA Appendix I in a name authority record for the expression.
Examples: Expression to Agent
Expression to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Rowling, J. K. $t Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban $s (Kay) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Illustrator: $a Kay, Jim $c (Illustrator) | |
Expression to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Bible. $l German. $s Luther. $f 1681 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Translator: $a Luther, Martin, $d 1483-1546 | |
Expression to Agent | |||
130 | 0 | Good King Wenceslas; $o arranged $s (McDonald) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Arranger of music: $a McDonald, Marshall | |
When recording relationships between a work/expression and multiple agents, record each agent in a separate 5XX field.
Examples: Work or Expression to Agents
Work to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Humphrey, Doris, $d 1895-1958. $t New dance | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Choreographer: $a Humphrey, Doris, $d 1895-1958 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Choreographer: $a Weidman, Charles | |
Collaborative work created by Humphry and Weidman. | |||
Work to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Tamaki, Mariko. $t This one summer | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Author: $a Tamaki, Mariko | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Artist: $a Tamaki, Jillian, $d 1980- | |
Collaborative work created by Mariko and Jillian Tamaki. | |||
Expression to Agent | |||
100 | 1 | Gide, Charles, $d 1847-1932. $t Histoire des doctrines économiques $s (Sixième édition). $f 2000 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Editor: $a Rist, Charles, $d 1874-1955 | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Writer of introduction: $a Cot, Annie L. | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Writer of introduction: $a Lallement, Jérôme | |
Although relationships designators may be used with authorized access points for places in bibliographic records, they may not be recorded in name authority records to relate a work/expression and place.
Example:
Bibliographic Record | |||
110 | 1 | Brazil, $e enacting jurisdiction. | |
240 | 1 | 0 | Constituição (1967) |
245 | 1 | 0 | Constituição da Républica Federativa do Brasil. |
Name Authority Record | |||
110 | 1 | Brazil. $t Constituição (1967) | |
No 5XX with a relationship designator is given because a relationship designator cannot be recorded in a 551 field according to the 551 field instruction sheet in DCM Z1 (see Appendix for more information). | |||
Relating Works/Expressions to Other Works/Expressions
Use relationship designators from Appendix J to record relationships between works/expressions and other related works/expressions.
Examples:
Work to Work | |||
100 | 1 | Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Return of the king | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Sequel to: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Two towers | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i In series: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Lord of the rings | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Adapted as motion picture (work): $a Lord of the rings, the return of the king (Motion picture) | |
Expression to Work | |||
130 | 0 | Gesta Romanorum. $l English | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Translation of: $a Gesta Romanorum | |
Sequential Series Relationships
For sequential relationships between two series, always record the reciprocal relationship in the corresponding record.
Example:
Work to Work | |||
130 | 0 | Wiley-Blackwell companions to art history | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Continuation of (work): $a Blackwell companions to art history | |
Work to Work—Reciprocal Relationship | |||
130 | 0 | Blackwell companions to art history | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Continued by (work): $a Wiley-Blackwell companions to art history | |
Multiple Entities and Relationships in one Name Authority Record
Examples:
Agent to Expression and Work to Expression | |||
100 | 1 | Galilei, Galileo, $d 1564-1642. $ Dialogo dei massimi sistemi. $l English $s (Finocchiaro) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Translator: $a Finocchiaro, Maurice A., $d 1942- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Abridger: $a Finocchiaro, Maurice A., $d 1942- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Abridgement of (work): $a Galilei, Galileo, $d 1564-1642. $t Dialogo dei massimi sistemi | |
Αgent to Expression and Expression to Expression | |||
100 | 0 | Aeschylus. $t Oresteia. $l English $s (Slavitt) | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Editor: $a Slavitt, David R., $d 1935- | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Translator: $a Slavitt, David R., $d 1935- | |
500 | 0 | $w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Agamemnon. $l English $s (Slavitt) | |
500 | 0 | $w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Choephori. $l English $s (Slavitt) | |
500 | 0 | $w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Eumenides. $l English $s (Slavitt) | |
Subjects
Subject Relationships
Examples:
100 | 0 | Eutocius, $c of Ascalon. $t Commentarius in libros de planorum aequilibriis | |
500 | 0 | $w r $i Commentary on (work): $a Archimedes. $t De planorum aequilibriis |
130 | 0 | Textes d’auteurs grecs et latins relatifs à l’Extrême-Orient | |
500 | 1 | $w r $i Commentary in (work): $a Sheldon, John $c (Research fellow). $t Commentary on George Coedès Texts of Greek and Latin authors on the Far East |
Example:
Bibliographic Record | |||
245 | 0 | 0 | KJV 400 : $b the legacy & impact of the King James Version. |
630 | 0 | 0 | Bible. $l English $x Versions $x Authorized. |
Name Authority Record | |||
130 | 0 | KJV 400 | |
530 | 0 | $w r $i Description of (expression): $a Bible. $l English. $s Authorized | |
Cambridge University Library [Photo credit: University of Cambridge]
MARC BIBLIOGRAPHIC AND RDA INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES
MARC AUTHORITY AND RDA INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES
Source: Library of Congress⁴
FAQ on Authorized Access Points for Collections of the Works of
Individual Agents and Works of Unknown Responsibility
that Purport to be by an Individual Agent
RDA Works
How do I choose the preferred title for a collection?
RDA 6.2.2.10 instructs: "If a compilation of works is
commonly identified by a title or form of title in manifestations embodying
that compilation or in reference sources, apply the instructions at
6.2.2.4–6.2.2.7." In other words, choose as the preferred title the title
by which the compilation is commonly identified. If, in the judgment of the
cataloger, the compilation does not have a title by which it is "commonly
identified," a conventional collective title is chosen as the preferred
title (see 6.2.2.10.2).[1]
This is entirely a matter for the judgment of the cataloger.
RDA itself gives little advice on how to decide if a title is the
"commonly identified" title of a collection. Clearly if a title
appears on the title page that is a title for the compilation. However,
that title is not necessarily the title by which a particular compilation can
be "commonly identified" by library users, even if the compilation
has been published only once. Catalogers might consider whether the title is easily
identifiable to users as the title of a particular collection or not. "The
Canterbury tales" is a well-known, distinctive, and easily identifiable
collection of stories by Geoffrey Chaucer and would be chosen as the preferred
title of this compilation over "Short stories. Selections".
Similarly, "A Shropshire lad" would be chosen as the preferred title
for this collection of poems by A.E. Housman rather than "Poems.
Selections". On the other hand, the title "Three stories and ten
poems", referring to a collection of stories and poems by Ernest
Hemingway, might in the judgment of the cataloger not be considered a title by
which the collection is "commonly identified" in the sense that it is
well-known, distinctive, and easily identifiable. In such a case the cataloger
might be justified in choosing "Works. Selections" as the preferred
title.
The
sub-instructions in RDA 6.2.2.10 distinguish between Complete Works, Complete
Works in a Single Form, and Other Compilations of Two or More Works.
Compilations that purport to be complete (RDA 6.2.2.10.1) should always
use the conventional collective title as the preferred title, whatever the
title of the manifestation. If the complete works (poems, etc.) of an
individual agent are published again under a different title this will create a
conflict; neither manifestation title will necessarily be the "commonly
identified" title of the individual agent's complete works (poems, etc.).
100 1_ Brewer, A. Herbert $q (Alfred Herbert), $d 1865-1928. $t Organ
music
Compilation
has title The complete organ works of Sir Herbert Brewer
100 1_ Clingerman, Mildred, $d
1918-1997. $t Short stories
Compilation
has title The Clingerman files : collected works
100 1_ Derozio, Henry Louis Vivian, $d 1809-1831. $t Works
Compilation
has title Song of the stormy petrel : complete works of Henry Louis
Vivian Derozio
110 2_ Mongolia. $t Constitutions
Compilation has title The constitutions
of Mongolia 1924, 1940, 1960, 1992
110 2_ Coldplay (Musical group).
$t Songs
Compilation has title
Coldplay : complete chord songbook
Unless a choice is clearly incorrect catalogers should
respect the judgment of other catalogers once a preferred title has been
declared by establishing it as part of the authorized access point in a NACO
authority record. Subsequent catalogers can always record additional variant
access points based on variant titles they might have chosen as the preferred
title.
Do preferred titles for complete collections of an
individual agent's work (Works, Plays, Poems, Paintings, Symphonies, etc.) need
to be qualified?
No. When considered as a whole there can be only one set of
the complete works (plays, etc.) of an individual agent. There cannot be a
collection referred to by the conventional collective title "Works"
(or "Plays", etc.) differing in content from another collection of
the complete works (plays, etc.) of that individual, and therefore that
preferred title will never need to be qualified to differentiate it. There may
be disagreements about the authenticity of certain of an individual's works but
in fact that individual created one and only one set of works (or plays, or
paintings, etc.).
100 1_ Angelou, Maya. $t Poems
100 0_ Aristophanes. $t Fragments[2]
100 1_ Ishiodori, Tatsuya, $d 1945- $t Paintings
100 1_ Sibelius, Jean, $d 1865-1957. $t Symphonies
100 1_ Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616.
$t Works
100 1_ Wilde, Oscar, $d 1854-1900.
$t Works
Note: For practical reasons compilations that purport
to be complete are considered to be complete. This is based on the principle of
representation. The cataloger is not required or expected to verify the
completeness of the collection, nor should the cataloger attempt to compare
different collections purporting to be complete to verify that they contain the
same works. (This applies to living persons, who may create more works after
the publication of a compilation purporting to be complete. Follow the
principle of representation and consider it to be complete.) In addition,
catalogers are not expected to make judgments about which works should or
should not be contained within an individual's canon of authentic works.
Can compilations created after an individual agent's
lifetime or without the individual agent's authorization be treated in this
way?
Yes. Collections and groupings of an individual's works can
be described in authority records and have authorized access points, particularly
if the grouping has become standard, even if the grouping is not the individual's
own.
100 1_ Cicero, Marcus Tullius. $t
Philosophical works
100 1_ Cicero, Marcus Tullius. $t
Rhetorical works
Do preferred titles for selections from the works of an individual
agent (RDA 6.2.2.10.2, RDA 6.2.2.10.3) need to be qualified?
Generally speaking, yes. Unlike compilations that purport to
be complete, there is no assumption that different compilations that purport to
be incomplete contain the same set of works. To the contrary, the assumption is
that they contain different works. For practical reasons catalogers make this
assumption; they are not required to compare the contents of different
collections to find out if they might contain the same works. The cataloger can
make the assumption that they are different. Therefore, if a conventional
collective title is chosen as the preferred title for the compilation, it will
generally be qualified[3] (note
the absence of subfield coding before the qualifier):
100 1_
Dickens, Charles, $d 1812-1870. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Christmas
stories)
100 1_
Dickens, Charles, $d 1812-1870. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Douglas-Fairhurst)
100 1_
Dickens, Charles, $d 1812-1870. $t Short stories. $k Selections (2016)
100 1_ Bernstein,
Leonard, $d 1918-1990. $t Vocal music. $k Selections (Bernstein for singers)
100 1_ Bernstein, Leonard, $d 1918-1990. $t Vocal music. $k Selections
(Bernstein theatre songs)
100 1_ Bernstein, Leonard, $d 1918-1990. $t Vocal music. $k Selections (New
York Festival of Song (Musical group))
100 1_ Bernstein, Leonard, $d 1918-1990. $t Vocal music. $k Selections (The
Bernstein songbook)
110 2_ Rometti
Costales (Artist group). $t Works. $k Selections (Little animals, ash trays)
110 2_ Rometti
Costales (Artist group). $t Works. $k Selections (2016)
Choice of qualifier. The qualifier may be any of the
elements listed in RDA 6.27.1.2: form of the compilation, date of the compilation,
place of origin of the compilation, or any other distinguishing characteristic
of the compilation. The cataloger should choose whatever qualifier best answers
the question: "what makes this compilation different from others?",
and whatever qualifier will best identify the compilation to database users.
This may involve consideration of the type of qualifiers that have already been
used in the file.
Exceptions to the need to
qualify
Compilations unlikely to
appear more than once. The
publication of selections of a person’s works is a somewhat rare occurrence,
and the publication of more than one different compilation occurs even less
often. If only one
compilation of selections of an individual agent’s complete works or complete
works in one form has ever been or is likely ever to be published, the cataloger
may choose to record a conventional collective title with
"Selections" without qualification. In such situations the choice to qualify
or not is entirely left to the judgment of the cataloger.
100 1_ Abad, José Ramón. $t
Works. $k Selections
100 0_ Chalœ̄msak
Ngǣmngām. $t Short stories. $k Selections
100 1_ Cordero,
Ernesto, $d 1946- $t Concertos. $k Selections
100 1_ Hannum,
Brian $c (Poet). $t Poems. $k Selections
110 2_ ATIKA
(Artistic group). $t Works. $k Selections
110 2_ Radiohead
(Musical group). $t Songs. $k Selections
If the judgment that selections
from an individual agent's works will not be published again later proves
incorrect, the decision can be revisited and the preferred title for the
first-published compilation may be qualified to distinguish it from that of the
new compilation. An authority record established for a subsequent compilation containing different
selections should always be qualified to differentiate it.
Well-known compilations. Certain compilations or groupings are
published over and over. If the cataloger knows different compilations contain
the same works, or if the compilations represent themselves as being the same,
the same preferred title may be used (including qualifier, if any) for
different iterations of the collection. In such cases it is likely that the
compilation will be known by a particular title and therefore the cataloger will
probably not choose a conventional collective title as its preferred title.
Whether a particular title or a
conventional collective title is chosen as the preferred title for the
compilation, the same principle applies as mentioned above under complete works.
If a compilation purports to be the same as another iteration of the
compilation it is considered to be the same. The cataloger is not required to
verify that the works contained in it are the same. This principle applies even
in extreme cases such as Walt Whitman's Leaves of grass, which started
out as a collection of twelve poems and grew through a series of editions
published during the author's lifetime to a collection of over 400.
100 1_ Whitman, Walt, $d 1819-1892.
$t Leaves of grass
If differentiation between the
editions is needed, it can be done at the expression level:
100 1_ Whitman, Walt, $d
1819-1892. $t Leaves of grass. $l English. $f 1860
Moving image works. Since motion pictures, television programs,
etc. are typically highly collaborative works, RDA 6.27.1.3 says to construct
the authorized access point representing the work by using a preferred title
for work only. The authorized access
point for a compilation of moving image works will therefore also be
constructed using the preferred title of the compilation.
130 _0
Collected films of Jorge Prelorán
130 _0 Films
of Chantal Akerman
130 _0 Palace
Films collection
130 _0
Universal classic television
However, if more than one
compilation has the same title, it will need to be qualified.
130 _0
Hitchcock collection (Force Entertainment)
130 _0
Hitchcock collection (MPI Home Video (Firm))
What about selections from a single work?
The same principles apply. If the single work purports to be
complete, for practical reasons and following the principle of representation,
the cataloger considers the work to be complete.
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis
If the resource purports to be a compilation of selections
from the work, and the specific selections cannot be identified, RDA directs us
to add "Selections" to the preferred title. The principle mentioned
under selections above applies here as well: the cataloger is not required to
verify whether the set of selections is (or is not) the same as another set of
selections from the same work. The assumption is that they are not the same and
so the preferred title is qualified:
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis. $k
Selections (Lewis)
A compilation by C.S. Lewis of
various passages from the Aeneid
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works. $k Selections (Anson)
A compilation of quotations
from Shakespeare with a rather vague title compiled by W.S.W. Anson
130 _0 Aesop’s fables. $k
Selections (Clarke)
A
selection of fables compiled by H. Clarke
If the compilation is of selections that can be identified,
they should be:
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis. $n Liber 1-6
A compilation of the first six
books of the Aeneid
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis. $n Liber 1
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis. $n Liber 3
100 0_ Virgil. $t Aeneis. $n Liber 5
A compilation
containing books 1, 3, and 5 of the Aeneid
What should be done if the preferred title for a
compilation is identical to one of the works in the compilation?
If the preferred title chosen for a compilation is the same
as or similar to one of the works in the compilation (or to any other work by
the creator), there is a conflict. The
compilation title should be qualified to break the conflict. There is no
prescribed term to use for this.
100 1_ Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow
smaller (Collection)
Contains the poem Hills grow smaller
100 1_ Gartner, Zsuzsi. $t Better living through
plastic explosives (Compilation)
Contains the short
story Better
living through plastic explosives
100 1_ Le Sueur, Meridel. $t
Women on the breadlines (Anthology)
Contains
the short story Women on the breadlines
100 1_ Zelazny, Roger. $t Unicorn
variations (Anthology)
Contains the novella Unicorn
variation; preferred title of the compilation is similar to the preferred
title of an individual work included in it
If an authority record for the individual work is also being
established, it should be qualified.
100 1_ Le Sueur, Meridel. $t Women
on the breadlines (Short story)
100 1_ Zelazny, Roger. $t Unicorn
variation (Novella)
Compilations with titles of the type "... and other
stories" "... and other poems", etc., do not need to be
qualified to distinguish them from the title of the individual work, although
the cataloger may optionally qualify the individual work.
100 1_ Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992.
$t Bicentennial man and other stories
100 1_ Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992.
$t Bicentennial man
100 1_ Rossetti, Christina
Georgina, $d 1830-1894. $t Goblin market and other poems
100 1_ Rossetti, Christina
Georgina, $d 1830-1894. $t Goblin market
100 1_ Card, Orson Scott. $t Unaccompanied
sonata & other stories
100 1_ Card, Orson Scott. $t Unaccompanied
sonata (Short story)
What variant access points should be made for
compilations of works?
Variant
access points are not required, but consider making them from the form(s) not
selected as the preferred title.[4]
100 1_ Hadley, Tessa. $t Short stories. $k
Selections (2017)
400 1_ Hadley, Tessa. $t Bad dreams and other
stories
400 1_ Hadley, Tessa. $t Short stories. $k
Selections (Bad dreams and other stories)
100 1_ Gartner, Zsuzsi. $t Better living through
plastic explosives (Compilation)
400 1_ Gartner, Zsuzsi. $t
Short stories. $k
Selections (Better living through plastic
explosives)
400 1_ Gartner, Zsuzsi. $t Short stories. $k
Selections (2011)
100 1_ Inge, William. $t Plays. $k Selections
(Somewhere in America)
400 1_ Inge, William. $t Somewhere in America
400 1_ Inge, William. $t Plays. $k Selections
(2016 : Somewhere in America)
Compilation of six
one-act plays
100 1_ Inge, William. $t Plays. $k Selections
(The apartment complex)
400 1_ Inge, William. $t Apartment complex
400 1_ Inge, William. $t Plays. $k Selections
(2016 : The apartment complex)
Compilation of
seven one-act plays
RDA Expressions
When should a conventional collective title for complete
works be qualified?
When differences between two complete collections of works
are found (e.g., different editorial notes, annotations, translators, content
type, etc.), that creates a different expression of the complete works. Add one or more qualifiers at the expression
level (content type, date of expression, language of expression, other
distinguishing characteristic of expression). Expression elements in access
points are separately subfielded.
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $f 1821
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works.
$f 1823
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works $s
(Murray). $f 1902
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works $s (Murray). $f 1913
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English. $f 2009
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English $s
(Buckley)
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English $s
(Buckley). $h Spoken word
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l Greek $s (Collection des universités de France)
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works.
$l Greek $s (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
(Spain))
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l
Latvian
100 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Poems $s (Mota)
100 1_ García Lorca, Federico,
$d 1898-1936. $t Poems. $l Portuguese $s (Melo)
100 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Works $s (García-Posada)
100 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Works. $l French. $f 1981
100 1_ Beethoven,
Ludwig van, $d 1770-1827. $t Sonatas, $m piano. $h Notated music $s (Associated
Board of the Royal Schools of Music)
100 1_ Beethoven, Ludwig van, $d 1770-1827. $t Sonatas, $m piano. $h Performed music
$s (Harmonia Mundi France)
100 1_ Beethoven,
Ludwig van, $d 1770-1827. $t Sonatas, $m piano. $h Performed music $s (Unicorn
Records (Firm))
For
translations, must the language of expression always be further qualified?
No, not if
there has been only one translation in that language to date. The example above of the Latvian translation
of Euripides’ complete works illustrates this.
There is no requirement that catalogers anticipate a future
conflict. However, if such a conflict
does exist or becomes evident later on, the authority record for a different
translation in the same language will need to be qualified further by date of
expression and/or other distinguishing characteristic of expression. It may also be useful to go back and revise
the earlier authority record to better identify that particular expression.
100 0_ Euripides.
$t Works. $l German
Existing authority
record created for a compilation translated by Ernst Buschor originally
published in six volumes from 1972-1981 with title Sämtliche
Tragödien und Fragmente
100 0_ Euripides.
$t Works. $l German $s (Ebener)
New
authority created for a compilation translated by Dietrich Ebener originally
published in three
volumes in 1966 with title Werke in drei Bänden and republished in six volumes in 1972-1980
with title Tragödien
How do I create an authorized access point for an
expression of "selections"?
NACO practice does not require the creation of an authority
record at the work level when creating an authority record for an expression,
but neither does it forbid it. It might
prove less confusing to create the work-level authority record following the instructions
above (including the necessary qualifier) before creating an expression
authority record. If you do not create
the work-level authority record you must still think out in your mind how the
work-level authorized access point would be formed. Do not forget to include the qualifier at the
work level.
Often the compiler is unknown for a collection that consists
of translations of an author who worked in another language. In such cases the surname of the translator
may be used as a work-level qualifier if it makes sense (sometimes the
translator is the compiler, though this need not be explicitly stated).
Beginning with the form you have worked out for the
work-level authorized access point, add expression-level elements (content
type, date of expression, language of expression, other distinguishing
characteristic of expression).
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k
Selections (Dodsley). $l German
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k
Selections (Thuswaldner). $l German
not
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k
Selections. $l German $s (Dodsley)
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k
Selections. $l German $s (Thuswaldner)
Remember: these are two
different collections, so a qualifier is needed at the work level
100 1_ Bañuelos, Juan, $d 1932-2017. $t
Poems. $k Selections (Nudo de tres vientos). $l French
not
100 1_
Bañuelos, Juan, $d 1932-2017. $t Poems. $k Selections. $l French $s (Roy)
A translation by Françoise
Roy
100 1_ Beckett,
Samuel, $d 1906-1989. $t Correspondence. $k Selections (Craig). $l French
not
100 1_
Beckett, Samuel, $d 1906-1989. $t Correspondence. $k Selections. $l French $s(Craig)
A translation by George Craig
What variant access points should be made for
compilations of expressions?
Variant
access points are not required, but consider making them from the form(s) not
selected as the preferred title, such as the manifestation title. It is cataloger judgment as to whether to
qualify the variant access point to distinguish it from identical variant
access points for other expressions of the same work.
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $f 1823
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Euripidis Tragoediae
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Tragoediae
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works.
$f 1885
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Euripidis Tragoediae. $f 1885
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Euripidis Tragoediae $s (Nauck)
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English. $f 2009
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Complete Euripides. $f 2009
400 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English $s (Greek
tragedy in new translations)
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works.
$l Latvian
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Eiripīds Trag̦ēdijas
400 0_ Euripides. $t Euripidou Tragōdiai
400 0_ Euripides. $t
Trag̦ēdijas
400 0_ Euripides. $t Tragōdiai
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k
Selections (Thuswaldner). $l German
430 _0 Aesopische Fabeln
100 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Poems $s (Mota)
400 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Obra poética completa
100 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Poems. $l Portuguese $s (Melo)
400 1_ García Lorca,
Federico, $d 1898-1936. $t Obra poética completa
Attributes
of Works and Expressions
What
attributes of works and expressions should be recorded as separate elements?
Catalogers
have the option to record any attributes of works and expressions in 046 and
3XX fields regardless of whether they are included in access points. These include date of work or expression
(046), content type of expression (336), place of origin of work (370),
language of expression (377), form of work (380), other distinguishing
characteristic of work or expression (381), musical work and expression
attributes such as medium of performance (382), numeric designation (384), and
key (385), as well as non-RDA elements such as audience and creator/contributor
characteristics (385 and 386). Do not
include expression attributes in work records or work attributes in expression
records. For example, do not include
language of expression in a work record or form of work in an expression
record.
Form of work (RDA
6.3, work records only)
100 1_ Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Novels. $k Selections
(Northanger Abbey and Persuasion)
380 __ Novels $2
lcgft
100 1_ Whitman,
Walt, $d 1819-1892. $t Leaves of grass
380 __ Poetry $2
lcgft
110 1_ Mongolia. $t
Constitutions
380 __
Constitutions $2 lcgft
100 1_ Schubert,
Franz, $d 1797-1828. $t Schlacht, $n D. 387
380 __ Musical
sketches $a Cantatas $2 lcgft
Place of origin of
work (RDA 6.5, work records only)
100 1_ Slimani, Leïla, $d 1981- $t Diable est dans les détails
(Anthology)
370 __ $g France $2 naf
100 1_ Futagawa, Yukio, $d 1932-2013. $t Photographs. $k Selections (2017)
370 __ $g Tokyo (Japan) $2 naf
100 1_ Pallēs, Alexandros, $d 1851-1935. $t Poems. $k Selections (Tragoudakia gia paidia)
370 __ $g Athens
(Greece) $2 naf
Medium of performance (RDA
6.15; under current RDA, work records only; under beta
RDA, expression records only)
100 1_ Abel, Karl
Friedrich, $d 1723-1787. $t Sonatas, $m violins (2),
continuo, $n op. 3
382 0_ violin $n 1 $p
flute $a violin $n 1 $a continuo $2 lcmpt
Content type (RDA
6.9, expression records only)
100 1_ Beethoven, Ludwig van, $d 1770-1827. $t Sonatas, $m piano. $h Notated music $s
(Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music (Great Britain))
336 __ notated
music $2 rdacontent
100 1_ Card, Orson
Scott. $t Pathfinder series. $l English. $h Text
336 __ text $b txt
$2 rdacontent
100 1_ Bova, Ben,
$d 1932- $t Short stories. $k Selections (The best of Bova). $n Volume 1. $h
Spoken word
336 __ spoken word $2
rdacontent
Language of
expression (RDA 6.11, expression records only)
100 1_ Bradbury,
Ray, $d 1920-2012. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Xin xing chu ban she
(Beijing, China)). $l Chinese
377 __ chi
100 1_ Deplazes,
Lothar. $t Poems. $k Selections (Umbrivas muentadas). $l German
377 __ ger
Other distinguishing
characteristic of work or expression (RDA 6.6, 6.12, 6.18, 6.21,
6.25)
100 1_ Alexander,
Lloyd. $t Chronicles of Prydain. $l English. $h Spoken word $s (Langton)
381 __ Langton
100 0_ Aeschylus. $t
Works. $l English $s (Smyth)
381 __ Smyth
130 _0 Bible. $l
English. $s Authorized. $f 1611
381 __ Authorized
100 1_ Manos,
Stephanos, $d 1939- $t Works. $k Selections (Antistrouthokamēlika)
381 __ Selections
$a Antistrouthokamēlika
100 1_ Hamilton,
Ian, $d 1938-2001. $t Poems. $k Selections (Pretending not to sleep)
381 __ Selections
381 __ Pretending
not to sleep
Audience
characteristics (385)
100 1_ Gay,
Marie-Louise. $t Picture books. $k Selections
385 __ Children $2
lcdgt
100 1_ Kipling,
Rudyard, $d 1865-1936. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Greathall Productions
Inc.). $h Spoken word
385 __ Children $2
lcdgt
Creator/Contributor
characteristics (386)
100 1_ Ercolani, Milena, $d 1963- $t Coccole di zucchero filato
(Collection)
386 __ San Marinese
$2 lcsh
386 __ Women $2
lcdgt
100 1_ Atwood,
Margaret, $d 1939- $t Bluebeard's egg (Collection)
386 __ Canadians $a
Women $2 lcdgt
100 1_ Twain, Mark,
$d 1835-1910. $t Works. $f 1972
386 __ Americans $2
lcdgt
386 __ Men $2 lcdgt
100 1_ Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Works. $k Selections (Lesley Castle)
386 __ Teenagers $a
Girls $a English $2 lcgft
Date of work or expression (RDA 6.4, 6.10)[5]
Note regarding coding of dates: The creation date
of a compilation is recorded in 046 subfields $k/$l. The creation dates of the individual works
contained in a compilation are recorded in 046 subfields $o/$p. Catalogers may record a range of dates in a single
046 in subfields $o and $p, or they may give the individual dates of the works
in a compilation in multiple 046 fields, in subfields $o/$p.
In authority records for compilations, use
subfields $k and $l only for creation dates of aggregates consisting of selections,
or for dates of creation of expressions. Do not use subfields $k or $l
in work-level records representing complete works (plays, etc.). Use subfields
$o and $p instead.
046 __ $k 1937 $2
edtf
100 1_ Akins, Zoë,
$d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow smaller (Collection)
380 __ Collection
380 __ Poetry $2
lcgft
386 __ Americans $2
lcdgt
386
__ Women $2 lcdgt
Compilation created in 1937
046 __ $o 1924 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 1940 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 1960 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 1992 $2 edtf
110 1_ Mongolia. $t Constitutions
380 __ Constitutions $2 lcgft
Compilation published in 2009 of the 1924, 1940,
1960, and 1992 constitutions (if later
constitutions appear additional 046 $o’s would be added)
046 __ $o 1899 $p 1924 $2 edtf
100 1_ Sibelius, Jean, $d 1865-1957. $t Symphonies
380 __ Symphonies
$2 lcgft
382
0_ orchestra $e 1 $t 1 $2 lcmpt
Compilation of
symphonies created from 1899 to 1924
046 __ $k 1955 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 1952 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 1954 $2 edtf
100 1_ Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Martian way and other stories
380 __ Science
fiction $a Short stories $a Novellas $2 lcgft
380 __ Anthologies $2 lcsh
Compilation created in 1955, containing three
works from 1952 and one from 1954
046 __ $k 2014 $2 edtf
046 __ $o 2003 $2
edtf
046 __ $o 2006 $2
edtf
100 1_ Gay,
Marie-Louise. $t Picture books. $k Selections
380 __ Picture
books $2 lcgft
380 __ Picture
books for children $2 lcsh
385
__ Children $2 lcdgt
Compilation created in 2014, containing two picture
books from 2003 and one from 2006
046 __ $k 1984 $2
edtf
046 __ $o 1954 $p
1982 $2 edtf
100 1_ Abbey,
Edward, $d 1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections (1984)
370 __ $g United
States $2 naf
381 __ Selections
381 __ Slumgullion
stew
386 __ Americans $2
lcdgt
386
__ Men $2 lcdgt
Compilation created in 1984, containing
selections of works created from 1954 to 1982
046 __ $k 1994 $2
edtf
130 _0 Aesop's
fables. $k Selections (Thuswaldner). $l German
336 __ text $2
rdacontent
377 __ ger
381
__ Thuswaldner
Compilation expressed in 1994 of selections by
Thuswaldner translated into German
046 __ $k 1984 $2
edtf
100 0_ Euripides.
$t Works. $l Latvian
377 __ lav
381
__ Feldhūns
Compilation
expressed in 1984 of Latvian translations by Ā. Feldhūns
046 __ $k 2016 $2 edtf
100 1_ Ada, Alma Flor. $t Memoirs. $k Selections. $h Spoken word $s (Alvarado)
336 __ spoken word
$b spw $2 rdacontent
381 __ Selections
381 __ Alvarado
Spoken word
recording expressed in 2016 of selections of Alma Flor Ada’s
memoirs,
narrated by Trini Alvarado
Relationships
What relationships to other entities should be
recorded?
Catalogers have the option to record
relationships in 5XX fields to agents responsible for the creation of a work or
expression, and to related works and expressions. Any entities recorded in a 5XX field must be
established in their own authority records.
Follow the PCC Guidelines for
the Application of Relationship Designators in NACO Authority Records.
100 1_ Derozio, Henry Louis Vivian, $d 1809-1831. $t
Works
500 1_ $w r $i Author: $a
Derozio, Henry Louis Vivian, $d 1809-1831
100 1_ Sibelius, Jean, $d
1865-1957. $t Symphonies
500 1_ $w r $i Composer: $a
Sibelius, Jean, $d 1865-1957
130 _0 Aesop's fables. $k Selections
(Thuswaldner). $l German
500 1_ $w r $i Translator: $a Thuswaldner,
Werner, $d 1942-
100 1_ Chopin, Kate, $d 1850-1904. $t Works. $k Selections
(2018). $h Spoken word
500 1_$w r $i Narrator: $a Berneis, Susie
100 1_ Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f
1598
500 1_ $w r $i Editor: $a Speght, Thomas, $d
-1621
500 1_ $w r $i Revised as: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey,
$d -1400. $t Works. $f 1602
500 1_ $w r $i Expanded as (expression): $a
Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f
1602
100 1_ Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f
1602
500 1_ $w r $i Editor: $a Speght, Thomas, $d
-1621
500 1_ $w r $i Editor: $a Thynne, Francis, $d
1545?-1608
500 1_ $w r $i Revision of: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey,
$d -1400. $t Works. $f 1598
500 1_ $w r $i Expanded version of (expression):
$a Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t
Works. $f 1598
500 1_ $w r $i
Revised as: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f 1687
100 1_ Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f
1687
500 1_ $w r $i Editor: $a Speght, Thomas, $d
-1621
500 1_ $w r $i
Revision of: $a Chaucer, Geoffrey, $d -1400. $t Works. $f 1602
110 2_ Radiohead
(Musical group). $t Songs. $k Selections
500 1_ $w r $i
Derivative (work): $a Reich, Steve, $d 1936- $t Radio rewrite
Of particular importance for compilations is the
relationship of a compilation to the works and/or expressions contained in
it. Catalogers are encouraged to record
such relationships when authority records for the individual works have also
been established. The reciprocal
relationship of individual work to compilation may also be recorded.
100 1_ Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow
smaller (Collection)
500 1_ $w r $i Author: $a Akins, Zoë, $d
1886-1958
500 1_ $w r $i
Container of (work): $a Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow smaller
(Poem)
Only the
title poem in the compilation has been established separately
Reciprocal
relationship
100 1_ Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow
smaller (Poem)
500 1_ $w r $i Author: $a Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958
500 1_ $w r $i
Contained in (work): $a Akins, Zoë, $d 1886-1958. $t Hills grow smaller
(Collection)
100 1_ Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Martian
way and other stories
500 1_ $w r $i Author: $a Asimov, Isaac, $d
1920-1992
500 1_ $w r $i Container of (work): $a Asimov,
Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Martian way
500 1_ $w r $i Container of (work): $a Asimov,
Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Youth (Short
story)
500 1_ $w r $i Container of (work): $a Asimov,
Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Deep
500 1_ $w r $i
Container of (work): $a Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Sucker bait
Reciprocal
relationship:
100 1_ Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Martian
way
500 1_ $w r $i Author: $a Asimov, Isaac, $d
1920-1992
500 1_ $w r $i
Contained in (work): $a Asimov, Isaac, $d 1920-1992. $t Martian way and
other stories
100 0_ Aeschylus.
$t Oresteia
500 0_ $w r $i Author: $a Aeschylus
500 0_ $w r $i Container of (work): $a Aeschylus.
$t Agamemnon
500 0_ $w r $i Container of (work): $a Aeschylus.
$t Choephori
500 0_ $w r $i
Container of (work): $a Aeschylus. $t Eumenides
Reciprocal
relationship:
100 0_ Aeschylus. $t Agamemnon
500 0_ $w r $i Author: $a Aeschylus
500 0_ $w r $i
Contained in (work): $a Aeschylus. $t Oresteia
100 0_ Aeschylus. $t
Oresteia. $l English
$s (Buckley)
500 1_ $w r $i Translator: $a Buckley, Theodore
Alois, $d 1825-1856
500 0_ $w r $i Contained in (expression): $a
Aeschylus. $t Works. $l English $s (Buckley)
500 0_ $w r $i Container of (expression): $a
Aeschylus. $t Agamemnon. $l English $s
(Buckley)
500 0_ $w r $i Container of (expression): $a
Aeschylus. $t Choephori. $l English $s
(Buckley)
500 0_ $w r $i
Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Eumenides. $l English $s
(Buckley)
Reciprocal relationship:
100 0_ Aeschylus.
$t Agamemnon. $l English $s (Buckley)
500 1_ $w r $i
Translator: $a Buckley, Theodore Alois, $d 1825-1856
500 0_ $w r $i
Contained in (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Works. $l English $s (Buckley)
500 0_ $w r $i Contained
in (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Oresteia. $l English $s (Buckley)
100 0_ Euripides. $t Works. $l English. $f 2009
530 _0 $w r $i In
series: $a Greek tragedy in new translations
Reciprocal
relationship:
130 _0 Greek tragedy in new translations
500 0_ $w r $i Series container of: $a Aeschylus.
$t Works. $l English. $f 2009
500 0_ $w r $i Series container of: $a Euripides.
$t Works. $l English. $f 2009
500 0_ $w r $i
Series container of: $a Sophocles. $t Works. $l English. $f 2010
NACO Authority File Maintenance
How should I treat records (including authorized access
points) already in the file that appear to be incorrect?
Authorized access point. Many "selections" authorized access
points currently in the file appear to represent work-level collections, but
have been formulated incorrectly for RDA. Do not follow an incorrect pattern
when creating a new description, and optionally revise incorrect forms you find
in the file as needed, including forms in 1XX fields, even if the record has
been coded as "rda". (Note: if the record represents more than
one aggregate work or expression, follow the procedure outlined below under
"Coverage of the record.”)
The following authorized access points are incorrectly
formulated, but the record itself represents only one collection. After
revision of the authorized access point no further work or reporting is
required, although other elements may be added to the record.
Existing authorized access
point:
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections. $f 1984
A
collection with title Slumgullion stew : an Edward Abbey reader
Revise to:
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Slumgullion stew[6]
or
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections (1984)
or
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections (Slumgullion stew)
Existing authorized access
point:
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections. $f 2005
A
collection with title The best of Edward Abbey
Revise to:
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections (2005)
or
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Works. $k Selections (The best of Edward
Abbey)
but not
100 1_ Abbey, Edward, $d
1927-1989. $t Best of Edward Abbey
Best of Edward
Abbey considered to be too general to identify this particular
compilation[7]
The same applies to authorized access points for selections
that appear to have been intended to represent expressions. Most
expression-level forms for selections currently in the file have not been
formed according to RDA principles and should be revised even if they have been
coded as "rda".
Existing authorized access
point:
100 1_ Baum, L. Frank $q (Lyman
Frank), $d 1856-1919. $t Wizard of Oz. $k Selections.
$l Chinese $s
(Liu)
Selections edited by Le
Shangxing and translated by Liu Yu
Revise to:
100 1_ Baum,
L. Frank $q (Lyman Frank), $d 1856-1919. $t Wizard of Oz. $k Selections (Le).
$l Chinese
or
100 1_ Baum,
L. Frank $q (Lyman Frank), $d 1856-1919. $t Wizard of Oz. $k Selections (Le).
$l Chinese $s (Liu)
Existing
authorized access point:
100 1_
Benjamin, Walter, $d 1892-1940. $t Short stories. $k Selections. $l Spanish $s
(Magnus)
A selection of stories edited
by Jorge Monteleone and translated by Ariel Magnus
Revise to:
100 1_ Benjamin,
Walter, $d 1892-1940. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Monteleone). $l Spanish
or
100 1_
Benjamin, Walter, $d 1892-1940. $t Short stories. $k Selections (Monteleone).
$l Spanish $s (Magnus)
Coverage of the record. It is a principle
of authority work that an authority record represents and identifies one and
only one entity. The only exception was
for undifferentiated personal names and that exception has been rescinded for
PCC practice under RDA. RDA does not recognize
“undifferentiated” work or expression descriptions (i.e., records that
represent more than one work or expression).
If you encounter a work or expression authority record that
represents more than one compilation of works or expressions, do not use the
authorized access point. Instead, create a new authority record for the work or
expression you need to describe, including a new authorized access point that
is different from the one you found in the "undifferentiated" record
following procedures described earlier in this document. If "your"
compilation is represented in a note (e.g. 670) in the original
"undifferentiated" authority record, remove the note. Optionally you
may create new records and authorized access points for other compilations remaining
in the original record, but this is not required.
Add one of the following notes to the original record to help
subsequent catalogers avoid using the authorized access point and as a signal
that other compilations were once in the record:
667 __ Do not use. Represents more
than one compilation of works [or expressions]. Do not add to this record.
Instead, create new name authority records for distinct compilations.
or
667 __ Do not use. Represents more
than one compilation of works [or expressions]. Reported for deletion.
Add the following note to the new work or expression authority
record if appropriate:
667 __ Previously represented on name
authority record [LCCN]
When the cataloger encounters a record that has gradually had
works/expressions removed and now has only one work or expression represented
in 670 notes, a new name authority record should be created and the original
record should be reported to LC for deletion, following a procedure similar to
that used under PCC policy for undifferentiated personal names.
Work records.
Many authority records appearing to represent a selection actually
represent more than one compilation.
These should be canceled and new NARs created for the separate works. You may add a 667 note telling catalogers not
to use the record pending cancellation.[8]
Existing authority record:
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections
400 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Guide to being born
400 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Awayland
670 __ A guide to being born, 2013.
670 __ Awayland, 2018.
This authority
record coded as RDA represents two completely different selections of Ausubel’s
short stories. This record should be
canceled and new work-level NARs created for each collection. You may add a 667 note telling catalogers not
to use the record while waiting for it to be canceled:
667 __ Do not use. Represents more than one distinctive selection of
works. Reported for deletion.
Authorized access point for
the collection A guide to being born:
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Guide
to being born[9]
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (2013)
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (A guide to being born)
Authorized access point for
the collection Awayland:
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t
Awayland[10]
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (2018)
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (Awayland)
Note: Work-level authority records for complete
collections may correctly include variant titles for different publications of
the complete collection. These records do not need revision. All the titles
represent the same hypothetical collection, the complete works (poems, etc.) of
an individual.
100 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Poems
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Collected poems
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Poetical works of Edgar Allan Poe
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Collected poems, essays on poetry
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Complete poetical works
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Poems of Edgar Allan Poe
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Poems and essays on poetry
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Complete poetry of Edgar Allan Poe
400 1_ $a
Poe, Edgar Allan, $d 1809-1849. $t Complete poems
670 __ $a His
Collected poems, 1893.
670 __ $a His
The poetical works of Edgar Allan Poe, 1978.
670 __ $a His
Collected poems, essays on poetry, 1977.
670 __ $a His
The complete poetical works, 189-?
670 __ $a His
The poems of Edgar Allan Poe, 1970: $b text (complete poems)
670 __ $a
Poems and essays on poetry, 1995.
670 __ $a The
complete poetry of Edgar Allan Poe, 1996.
670 __ $a
Complete poems, 2000.
Expression records. Many
authority records appearing to represent an expression of complete works
actually represent more than one expression of the complete works. These should
be canceled and new NARs created for the separate expressions. You may add a
667 note telling catalogers not to use the record pending cancellation:
667 __ $a Do not
use. Represents more than one expression. Reported for deletion.
Expression-level records that had
been based on such records will need revision.
Existing authority record:
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections. $s Spoken word (Heyborne)
400 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Awayland $s Spoken
word (Heyborne)
500 1_ $w r $i Narrator: $a Heyborne, Kirby
670 __ Ausubel, Ramona. Awayland [SR], ℗2018: $b
publisher supplied information
(performed by Kirby
Heyborne and other various narrators)
The authorized access point in this record
started with the existing work-level authorized access point for selections of Ausubel’s
short stories (see above example), and the cataloger added expression
attributes to it. However, as seen
above, the existing NAR represented two different story collections. The authorized access point in the record for
the spoken word recording of Awayland should be revised (depending on
what was chosen as the authorized access point at the work-level) to:
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t
Awayland. $h Spoken word $s (Heyborne)[11]
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (2018). $h Spoken word $s
(Heyborne)
or
100 1_ Ausubel, Ramona. $t Short
stories. $k Selections (Awayland). $h Spoken word $s
(Heyborne)
Existing
authority record:
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works. $f 1966
400 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Kittredge-players edition of the
complete works of William Shakespeare. $f 1966
400 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Plays and poems of William Shakspeare.
$f 1966
670 __ His
The Kittredge-players edition of the complete works of William Shakespeare,
1966, c1958.
670 __ His
The plays and poems of William Shakspeare, 1966.
This record demonstrates two
problems common in NACO authority records for expressions of Shakespeare’s
complete works. First, it represents two expressions, an issue already
discussed above. Second, looking carefully the 670 detailing the
Kittredge-players expression, we see that the date of this expression is
actually 1958 (which potentially might already be represented by a different
NAR); the 1966 date is the manifestation date of a reprint of this expression.
To summarize: 1, in many cases
NACO authority records for Shakepeare compilations represent more than one
expression; and 2, in many cases single expressions of Shakespeare compilations
have more than one NAR because under AACR2 they were differentiated by date of publication
(manifestation), not by date of expression.
The existing record should be
replaced by records for the separate expressions:
Possible
authorized access points for The Kittredge-players edition of the complete
works of William Shakespeare
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works $s (Kittredge-players edition of
the complete works of William Shakespeare). $f 1958
or
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works. $l English $s (Kittredge-players
edition of the complete works of William Shakespeare)
or
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works $s (Kittredge-players edition of
the complete works of William Shakespeare)
Possible
authorized access points for The plays and poems of William Shakspeare
(edited by Edmond Malone, published by AMS Press)
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works. $f 1966 $s (AMS Press)
or
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works. $l English $s (Malone)
or
100 1_
Shakespeare, William, $d 1564-1616. $t Works $s (Malone)
Similar problems exist in NARs for other individuals whose
works or selections have been published many times.
Existing
authority record:
100 0_ $a Euripides. $t Works. $k
Selections. $l English. $f 1998
400 0_ $a Euripides. $t 10 plays. $f 1998
400 0_ $a Euripides. $t Medea and
other plays. $f 1998
400 0_ $w nnea $a Euripides. $t Selections. $l English. $f 1998
667 __ $a Do not use. Represents
more than one expression. Reported for deletion.[12]
670 __ $a Medea and other plays,
1998.
670 __ $a 10 plays, c1998.
This NAR represents English
translations of two separate sets of Euripides' plays. This record was replaced with the following
two records (abbreviated):
100 0_ $a
Euripides. $t Works. $k Selections (Roche : 10 plays). $l English
670 __ $a
Euripides. 10 plays, 1998: $b title page (new translation by Paul Roche)
contents (Alcestis -- Hippolytus -- Ion -- Electra -- Iphigenia at Aulis --
Iphigenia among the Taurians -- Medea -- The Bacchae -- The Trojan women -- The
Cyclops)
Note: there
is more than one collection of Euripides's plays translated into
English by
Paul Roche, so the work-level preferred title includes two qualifiers
100 0_ $a
Euripides. $t Works. $k Selections (Morwood : 1998). $l English
670 __ $a
Euripides. Medea and other plays, 1998: $b title page (Medea ; Hippolytus ;
Electra ; Helen ; translated and edited by James Morwood) series (Oxford
world’s classics)
Note: there
is more than one collection of Euripides's plays translated into
English by
James Morwood, so the work-level preferred title includes two
qualifiers
[1] Note that 6.2.2.10.3 gives
the cataloger the option of bypassing the question of preferred title for the
compilation entirely by naming the individual works in the collection instead.
[2] The conventional
collective title "Fragments" should be treated as denoting
completeness, i.e., the complete set of an individual's fragments, even though
for ancient authors such as Aristophanes new fragments may be discovered from
time to time.
[3] From August-December 2020, the PCC is conducting a
Feasibility Study to reduce the number of conventional collective titles that
are created or used according to the Alternative in RDA 6.2.2.10.3. In the
Feasibility Study, RDA 6.2.2.10 will be applied to incomplete compilations of
literary forms by one agent, resulting in the manifestation title being
selected as the preferred name for the compilation. Please see the NACO Advisory
Group website for more
information about the Feasibility Study.
[4] Note that in the PCC
Feasibility Study (see Footnote 3), creating an authority record in order to
record a variant access point using conventional collective title construction
is discouraged.
[5] The examples follow the best practices developed by the SAC
Subcommittee on Faceted Vocabularies for bibliographic records (http://hdl.handle.net/11213/14591)
[7] In the PCC Feasibility Study, the concept of “adequate
title” is not considered, and the preferred title in this case would be “Best
of Edward Abbey”
[8] In the PCC Feasibilty
Study, only the variant access point representing the manifestation title being
cataloged, and the accompanying 670 field, will be removed from the authority
record. If the authority record is not coded RDA, the cataloger is not required
to re-code it to RDA.
[9] The preferred choice in
the PCC Feasibility Study, although an authority record would most likely not
be created.
[10] The preferred choice in
the PCC Feasibility Study, although an authority record would most likely not
be created.
[11] The preferred choice in
the PCC Feasibility Study, although an authority record would most likely not
be created.
[12] Added
to existing authority after new authorities for the two different expressions
represented by the existing record were created.
Last update: October 2, 2020
General Guidelines
The following PCC guidelines were developed in consultation with the Library of Congress Policy and Standards Division:
These guidelines apply to PCC catalogers using existing authority records in PCC bibliographic records, creating new authority records, and using existing authority records. For the context of these guidelines, an "RDA acceptable" authority record is one that is coded as AACR2, but the heading would be constructed the same under RDA and applicable LC-PCC PSs.
AACR2 or earlier records that contain the 667 note indicating that the record must be reviewed and/or updated when used in an RDA context are NOT necessarily "RDA acceptable."
Updates to Existing Records
1. For authorized access points in bibliographic records, PCC catalogers will use authorized forms of names and titles established in existing RDA and "RDA acceptable" authority records. Some bibliographic records may contain a mix of authorized headings for different names or titles because the supporting authority records may be coded AACR2 or RDA.
2. If no RDA or "RDA acceptable" AACR2 authority record exists, NACO catalogers will create RDA authority records. The resulting RDA authorized access points will be used as needed on RDA and AACR2 bibliographic records.
3. If using an "RDA acceptable" heading in PCC cataloging, PCC catalogers are strongly encouraged to evaluate and recode the authority record to RDA whenever possible. "Evaluate" means you should check the usage(s) of the entity as recorded in the 670 field(s) of the authority record and assess the correctness of the heading based on the usages recorded. If an "RDA acceptable" authority record is being updated for another reason (for example, to add a 4XX variant, or to add new identifying characteristics), PCC catalogers are required to evaluate and recode the record to RDA. There is one exception to this required recoding, however: when a record is being updated only to change a 5XX field, in response to changing a 1XX in another record, evaluation and recoding of the record with the 5XX is strongly encouraged, but not required. See 5) and 6) below for more information.
4. "RDA acceptable" AACR2 1XX fields may be used as the base element in a new extended RDA authorized access point (such as a name-title or subordinate body record), or as an addition to an RDA authorized access point (such as a place or associated institution). When using an AACR2 1XX heading as the base element in an extended RDA authorized access point, or as an addition to an RDA authorized access point, the AACR2 authority record must be re-coded to RDA. Optionally, any other existing dependent records may also be re-coded to RDA.5. If the evaluation and re-coding of an existing authority record results in a change to the 1XX field, and that 1XX is also used as a 5XX field in another record, the 5XX field in the other record must be changed per NACO Normalization rules. When updating the record containing the 5XX field, the cataloger is strongly encouraged to evaluate the entire record and re-code it to RDA.
6. If the evaluation and re-coding of an existing authority record will result in a change to a 5XX field, the record in which the 5XX is established as a 1XX must get its 1XX field changed per NACO Normalization rules. When updating the record containing the 1XX field, the entire record must be evaluated and re-coded to RDA.
Note that the automated changes to the LC/NACO authority file for Phase 2 may have recoded an existing extended authority record to RDA (for example, when the abbreviation for "Dept." appeared in a subordinate body), but the base heading itself is still AACR2 because it was not a candidate for a Phase 2 change. Catalogers are strongly encouraged to evaluate and recode the base heading, but there is no requirement to do so.
Conference Headings and Access Points
If an AACR2 authority record exists for an ongoing conference treated collectively (i.e., the heading for the conference does not include the number date or place of any one specific conference), and the heading is acceptable under RDA, PCC catalogers may create new RDA authorized access points for individual instances of the ongoing conference. These RDA authorized access points will include additions such as number, date, and place, according to RDA 11.13.1.8.1. Consult the LC-PCC PS for 11.13.1.8.1 for additional information on references and notes. An authority record for a collective ongoing conference should not be deleted, nor converted to represent a single instance of the ongoing conference.
Undifferentiated Personal Name Authority Records
If an existing authority record for a personal name is an undifferentiated name record and there is now a differentiating attribute available (such as a date of birth, a date of death, a fuller form of name, period of activity, profession or occupation, title of the person including terms of rank, honour, or office, or other designation associated with the person, etc.) for the person related to the resource being cataloged, create an RDA differentiated name authority record for that person, remove the appropriate 670 fields from the undifferentiated record, and report the necessary bibliographic file maintenance. PCC catalogers should not create new undifferentiated authority records, and should not add new entities to existing undifferentiated records. If only a single identity remains on an undifferentiated record (i.e., all other identities are being disambiguated and removed), consult DCM Z1 (008/32) for guidelines on how to replace that record with a new record.
“Undifferentiated” Conventional Collective Title Work and Expression Authority Records
New (October 2, 2020)
In the LC/NACO Authority File, many conventional collective title work and expression authority records for complete and partial compilations of resources by one agent are technically “undifferentiated” records, representing more than one compilation under the same authorized access point. These “undifferentiated” conventional collective title authority records in many cases have already been re-coded to RDA. NACO catalogers working with these “undifferentiated” conventional collective title authority records for compilations of resources by one agent, whether the authority record is coded RDA or AACR2, are encouraged to create differentiated work or expression authorized access points for one or more of the compilations represented by the conventional collective title. The Standing Committee on Standards (SCS) created a FAQ that describes these “undifferentiated” conventional collective title authority records.
The FAQ also gives guidance on optionally creating differentiated work or expression authorized access points for one or more of the compilations represented by the authority record, and guidance on adding 667 cataloger’s note information to these “undifferentiated” conventional collective title authority records with usage procedures, and information on reporting records for deletion.
Changes Taking Place in the LC/NACO Authority File
The LC/NACO Authority File has undergone numerous changes to accommodate RDA implementation. The changes are based on recommendations of the PCC Acceptable Headings Implementation Task Group. PCC catalogers should consult the document Summary of Programmatic Changes to the LC/NACO Authority File: What LC-PCC RDA Catalogers need to know as it contains critical information on working in the LC/NACO Authority File during the RDA transition.
REFERENCES
1. Library of Congress Catalog https://lccn.loc.gov/2018010715
2. PCC Guidelines for the Application of Relationship Designators in NACO Authority Records. Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov (accessed February 10, 2019). https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/OpCo-2016/PCCSCSSCTTFAuthRDsGuidelinesFinal20160412b.docx
3. RDA Toolkit. https://www.rdatoolkit.org/
5. Library of Congress, PCC Post RDA Test Guidelines. https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/PCC%20Post%20RDA%20Test%20Guidelines.html (accessed October 9, 2020)
SEE ALSO
FEEDBACK
- Help us improve this article! Contact us with your feedback. You can use the comments section below, or reach us on social media.