- For background information about the concepts of work, expression, and manifestation, see Tillett, Barbara B., What is FRBR? and RDA 0.2.2.
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.
- For detailed information about formulating accurate work AAPs, see the following:
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.
- These AAPs are found in the 130 or 1XX + 24X fields of bibliographic records for the manifestations.
- Expression-level AAPs, constructed from the AAP for the work, are required when representing an additional language expression.
- When cataloging a language expression other than the original, identify the expression by adding the name of the language in subfield ǂl to the AAP for the work.
- For detailed information about formulating accurate expression AAPs, see the following:
- GPO creates authority records for some expressions, as described in Name Authorities: Policy Overview, Works and Expressions.
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
- When constructing Authorized Access Points (AAPs) for works, there is one overarching principle:
- An RDA record must have an RDA compliant AAP.
- This is true even when an RDA record is derived from a record for another expression or manifestation of the same work. For guidance, see the table under Work AAPs for Collocation.
- An RDA record must have an RDA compliant AAP.
- Work AAPs serve two functions: differentiation and collocation. Consider both functions with every AAP construction, following the guidelines below.
- Additionally, see cataloging guidelines for specific formats and modes of issuance when applicable:
- Monographs: Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, Related Works and Expressions
- Congressional publications: Bibliographic Cataloging: Congressional Publications, 130/240- Unique Title for Work
- Cartographic materials: Bibliographic Cataloging: Cartographic Materials, 130/240 - Unique Title for Work
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
- cataloged under different rules
- 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
Draft GPO RDA record for a serial (incorrect)
245 00 Sleep problems.
264 #1 [Silver Spring, Md.] : ǂb Department of Health and Human Services, FDA, Office of Women's Health, ǂc 2013-
300 ## 1 online resource (volumes) : ǂb illustrations
Existing OCLC AACR2 record for an unrelated visual monograph, not in CGP
245 00 Sleep problems.
260 ## Stanford, CA : ǂb Stanford University Hospital, ǂc 1986.
300 ## 1 videocassette (30 min.) : ǂb sound, color ; ǂc 1/2 in.
New GPO RDA record for the serial (corrected to break conflict)
130 0# Sleep problems (United States. Food and Drug Administration. Office of Women's Health)
245 10 Sleep problems.
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.
- Keep in mind that while editions of a work share the same authorized access point, it is possible for the title proper (MARC 245 ǂa, ǂn, ǂp) of a revision to be different from that of the original.
- Occasionally the title proper will vary between records due to title layout on the preferred source.
- See Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, New Expression – Revision with different title proper.
- To determine whether a revised edition of a monograph qualifies as a new work needing a unique AAP, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, Revised Editions
- To determine whether a frequently revised monograph should be cataloged as a serial, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Continuing Resources: Serials, Monographs Cataloged as Serials ("Serials-of-Convenience").
- Keep in mind that while editions of a work share the same authorized access point, it is possible for the title proper (MARC 245 ǂa, ǂn, ǂp) of a revision to be different from that of the original.
- 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.
- 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).
- 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.
Record is coded as RDA | Record is NOT coded as RDA | ||
CGP record | Non-CGP record | ||
AAP is RDA compliant | Use the same AAP for the item in hand. | Use the same AAP for the item in hand. | Use the same AAP for the item in hand. |
AAP is NOT RDA compliant | See Related Records (forthcoming) for instructions on whether to correct the AAP or report it to a Metadata Integrity Librarian. | Do not copy the erroneous AAP. Construct a correct AAP for the item in hand. It is cataloger’s judgment whether to change the AAP in a record that will not be added to the CGP. | Do not copy the AAP. Construct an RDA compliant AAP for the item in hand. It is cataloger’s judgment whether to change the AAP in the existing record. |
Example
These two editions have a different statement of responsibility and different number of pages in 300, but examination of the PURLs revealed they are expressions of the same work. Therefore, the cataloger of the 2019 edition reused the RDA compliant work AAP from the 2013 edition.
2013 edition
110 2# National Assessment of Educational Progress (Project), ǂe author.
245 13 An overview of NAEP / ǂc National Assessment of Educational Progress.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, ǂc [2013]
300 ## 1 online resource ([3] pages) : ǂb illustrations (some color)
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo44680
2019 edition
110 2# National Assessment of Educational Progress (Project), ǂe author.
245 13 An overview of NAEP / ǂc National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences.
246 3# National Assessment of Educational Progress : ǂb an overview of NAEP
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, ǂc 2019.
300 ## 1 online resource (6 unnumbered pages) : ǂb color illustrations
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo116629
Shared RDA compliant work AAP:
National Assessment of Educational Progress (Project). An overview of NAEP.
Example
A new GPO record was derived from an existing record for an earlier edition of the same work. The existing record had been created according to an earlier descriptive convention, and its AAP was not unique in the catalog; therefore, the AAP could not be reused for an RDA record. To make the AAP in the derived record RDA compliant, the cataloger added a 240 field.
The cataloger chose to add the 240 to the AACR2 record for the earlier edition of the work cat as well.
Existing AACR2 record for earlier edition of the work cat
110 1# United States. ǂb National Park Service.
245 10 Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona / ǂc National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
260 ## [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, ǂc 1996.
300 ## 1 map : ǂb color ; ǂc 33 x 42 cm, folded to 11 x 21 cm
Draft GPO RDA record for the work cat (incorrect)
110 1# United States. ǂb National Park Service, ǂe cartographer.
245 10 Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona / ǂc National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, ǂc 2020.
300 ## 1 map : ǂb color ; ǂc 61 x 43 cm folded to 10 x 22 cm
Existing record for a conflicting work in OCLC
110 1# United States. ǂb National Park Service.
245 10 Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona.
260 ## Denver, Colo. : ǂb W.H. Kistler Stationery Co., ǂc 1941.
300 ## 4 unnumbered pages : ǂb illustrations, map ; ǂc 23 cm
New GPO RDA record for the work cat (correct)
110 1# United States. ǂb National Park Service, ǂe cartographer.
240 10 Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona (Map)
245 10 Canyon de Chelly National Monument, Arizona / ǂc National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior.
Example
A new GPO record was derived from an existing record for an earlier edition of the same work. The existing record was coded as RDA, but its work AAP was not RDA compliant because it did not account for corporate body authorship. Since the inaccurate AAP could not be reused in GPO’s new record, the cataloger constructed an accurate work AAP, including the 110 field.
The cataloger did not have a surrogate for the August version of the publication, so they could not copy catalog the existing OCLC record for the CGP. They chose not to correct the work AAP in that OCLC record.
Existing non-GPO RDA record for the February edition (incorrect)
OCLC 941798789
245 00 United States strategy to prevent and respond to gender-based violence globally.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C] : ǂb [U.S. Department of State] ; ǂc [2012]
300 ## 53 pages : ǂb color illustrations ; ǂc 28 cm.
500 ## "February 2012".
New GPO RDA record for the August edition (correct)
110 1# United States. ǂb Department of State, ǂe author.
245 00 United States strategy to prevent and respond to gender-based violence globally.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb United States Department of State : ǂb United States Agency for International Development, ǂc 2012.
300 ## 1 online resource (53 pages) : ǂb color illustrations
500 ## "August 2012"--Page 4 of cover.
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 add a 130/240 or 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:
- the form of work (see 6.3)
- the date of the work (see 6.4)
- the place of origin of the work (see 6.5)
and/or - 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 a 130 field for the preferred title qualified by an additional identifying element or elements.
Example
In database (OCLC)
245 00 Geospatial analysis and modeling : ǂb [... 3rd ICA Workshop on Geospatial Analysis and Modeling held August 6 - 7, 2009, in Gävle, Sweden ...] / ǂc guest ed.: Itzhak Benenson
260 3# Amsterdam [u.a.] ǂb Elsevier ǂc 2011
300 ## S. 91 - 182 ǂb graph. Darst.
710 2# International Cartographic Association ǂ0 (DE-601)100691226 ǂ0 (DE-588)26556-1
New work cat
Title proper: Geospatial analysis and modeling.
Publisher: [Washington, D.C.?] : ǂb United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, TEAMS Enterprise Unit
Date: [2014]
Physical description: 1 folded sheet (6 pages) : ǂb color illustrations ; ǂc 23 cm
To prevent a conflict in the database, the cataloger creates a 130 field for their work cat.
New GPO RDA record for the work cat
130 0# Geospatial analysis and modeling (Enterprise Program (U.S.). TEAMS Enterprise Unit)
245 10 Geospatial analysis and modeling.
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
Existing record for a conflicting work in OCLC
245 00 Abandoned and derelict vessels : ǂb an assessment of alternative State programs / ǂc by Redman/Johnston Associates, Inc ; with the assistance of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and the Virginia Marine Resources Commission.
260 ## Easton, Md. : ǂb Redman/Johnston Associates, ǂc 1999.
710 1# Maryland. ǂb Department of Natural Resources.
710 1# Virginia. ǂb Marine Resources Commission.
Draft GPO record for the work cat (130 qualifier not preferred)
130 0# Abandoned and derelict vessels (2017)
245 10 Abandoned and derelict vessels.
246 3# Abandoned and derelict vessels fact sheet
264 #1 [Silver Spring, Md.] : ǂb Marine Debris Program, Office of Response and Restoration, National Ocean Service, ǂc [2017?]
710 2# Marine Debris Program (U.S.), ǂe issuing body.
Using "2017" to distinguish is not an error, but it seems to imply that these are similar works, only differing chronologically. How do these two really differ? One is an assessment from state government bodies, while the other is a fact sheet from a government body. GPO best practice is to use a corporate body qualifier in this situation.
New GPO RDA record for the work cat (130 qualifier preferred)
130 0# Abandoned and derelict vessels (Marine Debris Program (U.S.))
245 10 Abandoned and derelict vessels.
264 #1 [Silver Spring, Md.] : ǂb Marine Debris Program, Office of Response and Restoration, National Ocean Service, ǂc [2017?]
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo88619 ǂ7 0
- 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.
- Based on the pattern of publication, is a new chronological edition of the same work expected?
Example
Existing record #1
(not RDA)
110 2# United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.
245 10 Sudan ǂh [electronic resource] : ǂb policy recommendations by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom / ǂc United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.
260 ## Washington, DC : ǂb U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, ǂc [2009]
300 ## 1 online resource ([6] pages)
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo2095 ǂ7 0
Existing record #2
(not RDA)
245 00 Sudan ǂh [electronic resource].
260 ## [Washington, DC] : ǂb United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, ǂc 2006.
300 ## 1 online resource (12 pages) : ǂb color illustrations.
490 1# Policy Focus
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo22721 ǂ7 0
Research
The cataloger received a third publication titled Sudan, issued in 2011. They compared their document to the publications represented by existing records #1 and #2 and easily determined that existing record #1 represents a different work. The cataloger also realized that record #2 should have had a 110 field. However, this would make its AAP conflict with record #1. Therefore, the cataloger added a 240 field with the series as a qualifier in record #2.
The cataloger then needed to determine whether their publication (#3) was the same work as record #2, because they are in the same Policy Focus series. The cataloger soon learned that each iteration in Policy Focus is based on a new visit to the country and therefore has substantially different content from the previous iteration. Thus, we expect each subsequent iteration to be a new work, not a new chronological edition (expression) of an existing work, and we don’t need to worry that a date qualifier might be reused for a later chronological edition. And since records #2 and #3 represent works that have the same purpose and were created the same way, it is helpful to have the “Policy focus” qualifier bring them together.
Update to existing record #2
(not RDA)
110 2# United States Commission on International Religious Freedom.
240 10 Sudan (Policy focus)
245 10 Sudan ǂh [electronic resource].
260 ## [Washington, DC] : ǂb United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, ǂc 2006.
300 ## 1 online resource (12 pages) : ǂb color illustrations.
490 1# Policy Focus
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo22721 ǂ7 0
New record for work cat (i.e., record #3):
(RDA)
110 2# United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, ǂe author.
240 10 Sudan (Policy focus : 2011)
245 10 Sudan.
264 1# [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, ǂc 2011.
300 ## 1 online resource (7 pages, 1 unnumbered page) : ǂb illustrations, map.
490 1# Policy focus / United States Commission on International Religious Freedom
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo229887 ǂ7 0
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 130 or 240 field 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.
Expression Authorized Access Points
- Because expression AAPs are based on work AAPs, expression AAPs are impacted by the guidance in Constructing Work Authorized Access Points and Resolving Work Authorized Access Point (AAP) Conflicts.
- When only one expression is cataloged, its AAP will simply be the work AAP.
- Exception: When the only expression received is not in English, try to determine the probable English title, and search for a copy of the English expression. If the English expression cannot be found, see No English Version Available, below.
- When additional expressions are cataloged, their AAPs are built from the work AAP in accordance with RDA and LC-PCC PS 6.27.3 and the guidance below.
- When only one expression is cataloged, its AAP will simply be the work AAP.
Language Editions and Translations
Language editions and translations are language expressions. For an explanation of the difference between editions and translations, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, Language Editions and Translations.
- When cataloging a language expression other than the original, construct its AAP by building on the work AAP of the original expression (which was typically issued in English for U.S. government publications).
- Record the work AAP in MARC 130 or 1XX + 240. In the 130 or 240, add subfield ǂl for the language of the expression.
Example
English
245 00 Diabetes in older people : ǂb a disease you can manage.
Spanish
130 0# Diabetes in older people. ǂl Spanish.
245 13 La diabetes en las personas mayores.
Example
Original language record
130 0# Personal protective equipment (United States. Occupational Safety and Health Administration : Fact sheet)
245 10 Personal protective equipment.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb U.S. Dept. of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, ǂc [2006]
300 ## 1 online resource (2 unnumbered pages).
490 1# OSHA fact sheet
856 40 ǂu http://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo14984
Other language version record
130 0# Personal protective equipment (United States. Occupational Safety and Health Administration : Fact sheet). ǂl Portuguese.
245 10 Equipamento de proteção individual.
264 #1 [Washington, D.C.] : ǂb Administração de Segurança e Saúde Ocupacionals, Departamento do Trabalho dos EUA, ǂc 2012.
300 ## 1 online resource (2 unnumbered pages).
490 0# OSHA ficha informative
856 40 ǂu https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo142829
No English Version Available
As English is the official language of the U.S. Government, it is assumed the majority of government publications have English as their original language. Occasionally, only a non-English expression is available to the cataloger. When this situation occurs, GPO applies RDA 6.2.2.3, 6.2.2.6, and 2.3.2.11, and constructs the work AAP using a preferred title in English.
- Attempt to confirm the English title in a reference source, such as the agency’s website.
- If the publication is in a series, check for English translations of other titles in the series. Use the same syntax to supply an English title for the publication in hand.
- If no reference is available to provide a preferred title in English at the time of cataloging, apply the following in the bib record for the non-English expression:
- Include a MARC 130/240 with the best available English translation of the title, followed by ǂl for the language being cataloged.
- Include the following note in a 500 field:
- Preferred title supplied by cataloger.
- Do not include a 775 linking field for the presumed English title.
Example
GPO received this Spanish-language publication. The cataloger searched the CGP, OCLC, and the Internet, but no English version of the document could be found. The cataloger used a translation program, along with their own knowledge of Spanish, to supply a title in English.
130 0# Management staff guide. ǂl Spanish.
245 10 Guía del personal directivo : ǂb pasos hacio el éxito : un deseño didáctico para los Asesores-Mentores de alfabetización temprana en Head Start y Early Head Start.
500 ## Preferred title supplied by cataloger.
Revised Editions
- To determine whether a revised edition qualifies as a new expression or a new work, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Monographs, Related Works and Expressions.
- To determine whether a frequently revised monograph should be cataloged as a serial, see Bibliographic Cataloging: Continuing Resources: Serials, Monographs Cataloged as Serials ("Serials-of-Convenience").
Per RDA 6.27.1.5: “If the work is presented simply as an edition of the previously existing work, treat it as an expression of that work. Use the authorized access point representing the previously existing work. If it is considered important to identify the particular expression, construct an authorized access point representing the expression as instructed at 6.27.3.” GPO does not consider it “important to identify the particular expression” in these cases.
GPO Practice
- When cataloging chronological editions (2nd edition, 3rd edition, 2010, 2012, revised 2009, etc.) as monographic expressions of a work, do not distinguish their AAPs. This allows the editions to collocate in the catalog.
Example
Examination of the following documents reveals they are two editions (expressions) of the same work. Therefore, the bibliographic records representing them should share the same authorized access point for the work.
Existing record for earlier expression of the work cat in OCLC
OCLC #707489692
100 1# Hill, Matthew J., ǂd 1981-
245 12 A computational investigation of gear windage.
260 ## [University Park, Pa.] : ǂb Pennsylvania State University, ǂc 2010.
300 ## 1 electronic document (163 p.)
500 ## Thesis advisor: Lyle N. Long, Robert F. Kunz.
502 ## Thesis (Ph.D.)--Pennsylvania State University, 2010.
700 1# Kunz, Robert Francis, ǂe thesis advisor.
856 40 ǂu http://etda.libraries.psu.edu/theses/approved/WorldWideIndex/ETD-5871/index.html
New GPO record for the work cat
100 1# Hill, Matthew J., ǂd 1981- , ǂe author.
245 12 A computational investigation of gear windage / ǂc Matthew J. Hill and Robert F. Kunz.
264 #1 Cleveland, Ohio : ǂb National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Glenn Research Center, ǂc 2012.
300 ## 1 online resource (xi, 149 pages) : ǂb illustrations (some color).
513 ## Final contractor report.
700 1# Kunz, Robert F., ǂe author.
856 40 ǂu http://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo37817