Кандидат на престол : из истории политических и культурных связей России и Швеции ХI-ХХ веков / Г.М. Коваленко. (OCLC #43227577)

MARC field 530 is a general note about the availability of additional physical or digital forms:

530 __ ǂa Also issued online.

More specific information goes into 776:

776 08 ǂi Online version: ǂa Kovalenko, G.M. (Gennadii
    ̆ Mikhaĭlovich). ǂt Kandidat na prestol. ǂd Sankt-Peterburg
    : Russko-baltiĭskiĭ informat︠s︡ionnyĭ t︠s︡entr BLIT︠S︡, 1999 ǂw 

Currently, MARC records in OCLC are created at the manifestation level, and this method can be used to link together different manifestations of the same expression.


Witchcraft / by Charles Alva Hoyt ; [edited by Beatrice R. Moore]. (OCLC #6862966)

This expression exists in two manifestations: the print volume we had in hand, and an electronic version at Google Books and HathiTrust (search only).

In MARC, the link between manifestations is recorded in the “additional physical form” field, 776:

776 08 ǂi Online version: ǂa Hoyt, Charles Alva. ǂt Witchcraft.
  ǂd Carbondale : Southern Illinois University Press, ©1981
  ǂw (OCoLC)608095693

La obra completa / Mateo Alemán ; Pedro M. Piñero Ramírez y Katharina Niemeyer (directores) (OCLC #897118689)

RDA on Complete Works says that such works should get the conventional collective title Works as their preferred title, which in MARC looks like:

240 10 ǂa Works

The Title Proper (associated with the particular manifestation) is also recorded:

245 13 ǂa La obra completa / ... 

This is not my hat / Jon Klassen. (OCLC #779856963)

For last week’s Third Thursday training on Using the RDA Toolkit, we cataloged a book in a non-MARC environment: post-its on posterboard with yarn relationships. It includes all core elements (and some non-core elements that we judged helpful for clarity, selection), taken from appropriate sources of information, and recorded/transcribed according to RDA rules.

(A few elements (like some Identifiers) and relationships (like some Primary Relationships) are recorded on the backs for tidiness.)


Cortázar y París : Último round / Izara Batres. (OCLC #879865498)

This book is about another book: Ultimo round / Julio Cortazar. In a FRBR environment, we could link these related works with designators such as described in/description of, but in MARC records, we record this relationship with subject headings:

    600 10 ǂa Cortázar, Julio. ǂt Último round
    600 10 ǂa Cortázar, Julio ǂx Criticism and interpretation.

The free-floating subdivision “Criticism and interpretation” is only for use under people, so we must use both headings to record the criticism aspect and the specific title.

The call number for a commentary on an individual work is constructed by appending ‘3’ to the last cutter in the call number for the original work, in this case:

    PQ7797.C7145 U43 2014

Great expectations / Charles Dickens ; retold by Clare West. (OCLC #182520269)

We recently got a collection of simplified editions of classic works. For example, where the original says:

My father’s family name being Pirrip, and my Christian name Philip, my infant tongue could make of both names nothing longer or more explicit than Pip. So, I called myself Pip, and came to be called Pip.

This version says:

My first name was Philip, but when I was a small child I could only manage to say Pip. So Pip was what everybody called me.

I wondered, is this a new expression of the work “Great Expectations” created by Charles Dickens? (maybe an adaptation or free translation?) or is it a whole new work? Who should be recorded as the creator?

RDA includes as an example this very situation (and this very title, but with a different reteller):

Great expectations / Charles Dickens ; retold by Florence Bell

and indicates that “Florence Bell” should be recorded as the creator of the (new) work.


Laboratory evaluations of stabilized flue gas desulfurization sludge (scrubber sludge) and aggregate mixtures / by Mark Anderson, Gary W. Sharpe, David L. Allen, Herbert F. Southgate and Robert C. Deen. (OCLC #884361903)

When I first started cataloging ebooks, the standard was to catalog them as electronic reproductions of print, and with a separate record for each platform that provided the title. This made some sense, but was frustrating for copy cataloging when you’d see only a skimpy record for the copy you had access to, but a robust popular record for the copy from another vendor.

In 2009, the preferred standard changed to provider-neutral records; that is, all copies of a particular ebook should now be cataloged on a single record with 856 fields for each link that provides access to it. Fields in this record describe an electronic resource (rather than mainly describing print, with reproduction notes in a 533) and do not include details that only apply to specific platforms, such as added entries for the distributor or 506 notes describing restrictions on access. Such details can be added to local catalogs if they are helpful to patrons.

Since a single provider-neutral record can be used for manifestations with various carriers (PDF, HTML, plain text) but not all carriers (excludes print, microform), the level of cataloging is somewhere between expression and manifestation.


Civilian space stations and the U.S. future in space. (OCLC #11477461)


Government documents are often available in multiple formats (print, electronic, microform). An older cataloging practice was to have a single bibliographic record representing the title in all formats (manifestations), but now we catalog each format on its own bibliographic record. In a FRBR or linked data environment where we are storing statements rather than pre-gathered records, there would be less of a distinction here.