Bibliographic Cataloging: Authorized Access Points for Works, Expressions, and Manifestations

  • Last Updated: June 24, 2025
  • Published: June 24, 2025

General Policies

Works

A work authorized access point (AAP) can be used to differentiate between multiple works or to collocate different expressions and manifestations of a single work.

A work AAP may be supported by a NACO authority record, or it may exist only in a bibliographic record.

  • GPO creates authority records for some works, as described in Name Authorities: Policy Overview, Works and Expressions.
  • For works that do not get established in the authority file, the work AAPs are found in the 1XX and/or 24X (creator/title) fields of the MARC bibliographic records for the manifestations.

Per RDA 5.5, the authorized access point (AAP) for a work is based upon either:

  • the preferred title of the work 

    (RDA 6.2.2.4 says a preferred title may be based upon the title proper. MARC 245 guidance says the title proper consists of the 245 ǂa, ǂn, and ǂp. The title proper does not include ǂb, remainder of title.)

      - or -

  • the preferred title of the work, plus the AAP for the agent responsible for the work 

    (An agent is responsible for the work if they are given an access point in the bibliographic record’s MARC 1XX field.)

According to RDA 6.27.1.9 and its LC-PCC PS, the AAP for a work in an RDA record must be completely unique to the work when compared against all other bibliographic and authority records in the catalog. “The catalog” in this context refers to the CGP and OCLC.

Expressions

An expression authorized access point (AAP) is used to collocate different expressions and manifestations of a single work.

Based on LC-PCC PS 6.27.3, the work AAP represents the original expression (which is typically English for U.S. government publications), as well as some revised editions.

Manifestations

GPO currently creates separate bibliographic records for the print, online, microfiche, and optical disc manifestations of a work or expression. Ideally, all these manifestation records share the same authorized access point, which uniquely represents the work or expression and collocates the manifestations. Due to past cataloging practices, this ideal is not always realized in the CGP.

  • To aid in collocation, use the same work or expression AAP in all records for equivalent manifestations – with three exceptions:
    • Non-RDA monograph records are not required to follow this practice.
    • For AACR2 serial records, see CONSER Cataloging Manual 33.18.5.
      • GPO Practice: Remove “Online” from existing 130/240 field qualifiers in GPO records, especially if the record in question requires additional changes, or if it is being linked to another record via 776 or 78X.
    • An RDA record for a newly cataloged manifestation may have a different AAP from non-RDA records for other manifestations of the same work or expression.
    • See the table in Work AAPs for Collocation for additional guidance.
  • Do not construct manifestation-level authorized access points.

Constructing Work Authorized Access Points

Work AAPs for Differentiation

According to RDA 6.27.1.9 and its LC-PCC PS, the AAP for a work in an RDA record must be completely unique to the work when compared against all other bibliographic and authority records in the CGP and OCLC.

  • A unique AAP must be constructed for the work in hand so that it does not conflict with a pre-existing record for:
    • An agent or place
    • A different work, even if that work is:
      • cataloged under different rules
        • e.g., RDA vs. AACR2
      • in a different format
        • e.g., map vs. sound recording
      • in a different mode of issuance
        • e.g., serial vs. monograph
  • When an RDA record is derived from a record for another expression or manifestation of the same work, but the original record does not have a unique work AAP, the conflict must be broken in the RDA record. For guidance, see the table under Work AAPs for Collocation.
  • For guidance on constructing unique work AAPs, see Resolving Work Authorized Access Point Conflicts.

[EXAMPLE]

Work AAPs for Collocation

  • Ideally, records for different expressions and manifestations of the same work share the same work AAP, to collocate the resources.
  • If there’s any chance an existing record in the CGP or OCLC could be related to the publication being cataloged, examine the existing record (and online version of the resource, if available) for clues about the relationship.
  • The requirement for an RDA compliant AAP overrides the goal of using the same work AAP for all manifestations and expressions of a single work. This is important to remember when there is a mix of RDA and non-RDA records for the work.
    • When cataloging according to RDA standards, evaluate any existing records for the same work to determine whether their existing AAP is RDA compliant.
    • When RDA records exist for a work, those records must share the same correctly constructed work AAP.
    • When RDA and non-RDA records exist for a work, they should share the non-RDA record’s AAP if it is RDA compliant.
      • If the non-RDA record’s AAP is not RDA compliant, a new AAP needs to be constructed for use in the RDA record(s).
        • This frequently occurs when existing records were cataloged under AACR2, which did not have work conflict provisions for monographs.
    • For additional instructions specific to monographs, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, New Expression – Revision’s authorized access point constructed according to a different descriptive convention.
    • In the following table, the bold text (with blue background) refers to characteristics of the existing bibliographic record for another manifestation of the same work or expression. The plain text (with yellow background) indicates the action that should be taken for the manifestation being cataloged according to RDA.
      • “CGP record” refers to one that is in the CGP or is being added to the CGP.
    • If the AAP for an RDA record is made unique with a 130 or 240 field, it is optional to add the same 130/240 field to non-RDA CGP records for other editions.

[TABLE]

[EXAMPLE]

[EXAMPLE]

[EXAMPLE]

Resolving Work Authorized Access Point Conflicts

When constructing an access point, test for conflicts against both bibliographic and authority records.

This does not mean that the authorized access point (AAP) in a bibliographic record cannot conflict with that in another record; it means that it cannot conflict with one that represents a different work or entity (see the examples in 6.27.1.9 to get a sense of this concept).

Different manifestations (print, online, microfiche, CD-ROM) of the same work share the same authorized access point.

OCLC and the CGP are the two databases against which the searching should be done.

The default authorized access point for a work consists of (RDA 5.1.4, 5.5):

  • the corporate body or person responsible for the work (100, 110, 111) and the preferred title for the work

      or

  • the preferred title only.

As stated in the Works section above, the preferred title is determined by the title proper, which consists of the 245 ǂa, ǂn, and ǂp. The title proper does not include ǂb, remainder of title. Per RDA 2.3.2.1, other title information (contained in ǂb) is not part of the title proper and therefore does not differentiate two works with the same title proper.

When the cataloger finds a bibliographic or authority record for a different work or entity in OCLC/CGP having the identical authorized access point as that of the resource being cataloged, the cataloger must break the conflict.

Remember, the conflict must be for different works, not merely for different records. Multiple records can have identical authorized access points if they embody the same work.

Catalogers have the option to {LINK} add a 130/240 or {LINK} edit the 245 to create a unique work AAP.

Adding 130/240 Unique Title

One option for breaking the conflict between otherwise identical AAPs for different works is to create a unique title (RDA 5.5, 6.27.1.1, and 6.27.1.9).

  • LC-PCC PS for 6.27.1.9 says: “Generally, resolve the conflict by making an addition in the authorized access point in the bibliographic or series authority record being created or adapted. Do not also modify the existing record. Some exceptions are noted in later sections of this Policy Statement.” Per RDA 6.27.1.9, add one of the following elements as appropriate:
    1. the form of work (see 6.3)
    2. the date of the work (see 6.4)
    3. the place of origin of the work (see 6.5)  
      and/or
    4. another distinguishing characteristic of the work (see 6.6)
  • The MARC field used to break the conflict depends on the components of the authorized access point.
    • When the authorized access point consists of a 1XX creator and 245 field: Add a 240 field for the preferred title qualified by an additional identifying element or elements.
    • When the authorized access point consists of a 245 field only: Add 130 field for the preferred title qualified by an additional identifying element or elements.

[EXAMPLE]

Qualifiers for monographs

GPO Practice

  • In general, avoid using a date as the only qualifier in the work AAP for a monograph. Prefer one of the following qualifiers when cataloging a monograph that needs to be distinguished from other works in the catalog:
    • Corporate body – when the conflict is with a publication issued by a different corporate body
    • Form of work – when the conflict is with a publication issued by the same corporate body
    • Series – when the conflict is with a publication issued by the same corporate body in the same format

[EXAMPLE]

  • It will occasionally be most appropriate to differentiate monographic works using a date qualifier. Consider:
    • Based on the pattern of publication, is a new chronological edition of the same work expected?
      • If another edition is not expected, a date qualifier is appropriate, as we are unlikely to have the confusing situation described in the example above.
      • If another edition is expected, consider taking one of the following actions:
        • Catalog the publication as a serial of convenience.
        • Construct a unique authorized access point in the existing record for the conflicting work.
    • Is the work directly related to a different work with the same base AAP (e.g., in the same series)?
      • The date may be an appropriate qualifier. This will help clarify the relationship while still distinguishing the works, as in the next example.

[EXAMPLE]

Editing 245 Title Statement

Due to the presentation of the title in many resources, there is a longstanding tendency to record distinctive title information as “other title information,” which is not included in the title proper and hence, in the preferred title, which comprises part or all of the authorized access point (AAP). As a result of this practice, the preferred title recorded by the cataloger may be nondistinctive, non-unique, and result in an authorized access point that is identical to that in many, different works. As a result, GPO has identified best practices which can be implemented in order to make the title proper (and hence, the preferred title and AAP) more distinctive and unique. These practices will result in less need to apply 6.27.1.9 by creating what were formerly called “uniform titles.” These best practices are demonstrated in Bibliographic Cataloging: General Policies, Punctuation in the Title Proper.

If you are unable to transcribe a unique (meaning unique from other works, not from other records) title proper or creator + title proper, from the presentation on your title source following the guidance in that section, you will need to apply 6.27.1.9 by adding a for a unique title. Do not resort to unconventional measures to construct a unique title proper, such as adding slogans, publisher's name, place of publication, date of publication, series statements, edition statements, numbering of serials, etc. to the title proper.