The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards

MARC Standards

HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List


MARC PROPOSAL NO. 2013-03

DATE: December 20, 2012
REVISED:

NAME: Making Field 250 Repeatable in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

SOURCE: Music Library Association (MLA), Library of Congress (LC)

SUMMARY: This proposal addresses the need for a repeatable 250 field in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format in order to better accommodate edition statements for music and other resources cataloged according to RDA.

KEYWORDS: Field 250 (BD); Edition Statement (BD)

RELATED: 2012-05

STATUS/COMMENTS:
12/20/12 - Made available to the MARC community for discussion.

01/27/13 – Results of MARC Advisory Committee discussion: Approved as submitted.

03/06/13 - Results of LC/LAC/BL review - Agreed with the MARBI decision.


Proposal No 2013-03: Making Field 250 Repeatable in the Bibliographic Format:

1. BACKGROUND

With the implementation of RDA, the type of information included in the edition statement as described in RDA 2.5.2.1 Designation of Edition, has been expanded from what could be included in an edition statement under AACR2.  From the perspective of the MARC 21 Bibliographic format, two types of data for notated music will move to the 250 field from other fields.  Specifically,

  1. Data known in AACR2 chap. 5.3 as the Musical Presentation Statement, “a statement found in the chief source of information indicating the physical presentation of the music”, such as “Full score”, or “Score and parts.”  That data will move to the 250 field.

  2. Certain statements that were recorded in the statement of responsibility in the 245 field under AACR2 because they involve the contribution of a person, family or corporate body.  Consequently, such statements as “Vocal score arrangement by Otto Singer”, or “Piano/vocal score by the composer”, will also move to the 250.

Both of these types of data are now covered by RDA 2.5.2.1, Scope, for Designation of Edition.  That instruction contains a list of various types of statements that are to be interpreted as designations of edition.  From that list, the statements on manifestations of notated music are covered by “a particular format or physical presentation” and “a particular voice range or format for notated music.”

In discussion of Proposal 2012-05, which also sought to make the 250 repeatable to record music-related edition designations in separate 250 fields, there was a considerable amount of debate about whether or not the Music Presentation Statement, specifically the coding of such in the 254, should in fact be discontinued, as was suggested at the time of initial RDA implementation. Additionally, the impetus to make the 250 repeatable garnered questions about whether or not this should apply to other formats as well, such as a DVD including two different director's cuts. Since these matters were not resolved, 2012-05 was not adopted, and was given to LC to rework in collaboration with MLA.

For RDA, though it is format neutral, the matter of continuing to use the 254 field, Musical Presentation statement (known in ISBD as “music format statement”), was definitively decided at the recent Chicago meeting of the JSC, when a proposal from the International Association of Music Libraries, Archives and Documentation Centres (IAML) to introduce this concept into RDA (http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-IAML-1.pdf) was rejected.  Both MLA and LC argued against it, MLA having gone into particular detail (http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-IAML-1-ALA-response.pdf, pp. 2-4).  In expressing their disagreement with that proposal, the JSC commented that it prefers “to emphasize the similarities between Edition statements and Format of notated music statements, rather than the differences, and therefore preferring that both ISBD elements be mapped to the RDA Edition Statement element” (official JSC reply not yet posted).  MLA and LC agree that users are better served through the RDA simplification of combining regular edition statements and music format statements together in a single element. To assist end users as this provision is implemented in the MARC 21 Bibliographic format, we believe repeatability of the MARC 250 edition statement can provide beneficial clarification.

2. DISCUSSION

In its comments on the previous proposal, MARBI “raised concern about whether the MLA music specialists agreed with the proposal and how it would be used for other forms of material.  It was suggested that the issues be reviewed by MLA before any further proposals be made.”  That this proposal is now submitted by MLA and LC together addresses the first of these concerns.  Turning to the second, the concept of multiple edition statements extends well beyond music.  So in section 2.2 below, in addition to an example for notated music we have suggested how a repeatable 250 field might be exploited for serials and books.

2.1. Current definition of Field 250

2.2. Examples of multiple edition statements for music and other materials

2.2.1. Example of usage for notated music:

The example contains a standard statement representing a numbered edition, a physical format statement, and a statement that the resource also contains an arrangement for piano by a named person.  The example also represents a resource where the relevant information is given in two languages.

Current practice:

250 ## $a Erste Ausgabe = $b First edition, Partitur und Stimmen = Score and parts, Klavierauszug / von Otmar Mayer = Piano reduction / by Otmar Mayer.

Potential application of repeatable 250:

Spreading the individual statements out, each in its own 250 field, provides a better eye-readable result and improves understanding of the edition element of the resource:

250 ## $a Erste Ausgabe =$b First edition.
250 ## $a Partitur und Stimmen = $b Score and parts.
250 ## $a Klavierauszug /$b von Otmar Mayer = Piano reduction / by Otmar Mayer.

While relatively few music resources contain all three types of edition designation as this example does, it is common in printed resources to have two types, and it is common for the resource to present the information in more than one language.

The following examples indicate that having more than one edition statement is not limited to traditional edition statements and former musical presentation/music format statements.

2.2.2. Example of usage for serials:

A potential application could be to record minor changes over time of edition statements (ones not requiring a new description) in the descriptions of serials, multipart monographs, or integrating resources.  Along with repeatability, addition of subfield $3 (Materials specified) to MARC Bib field 250 would also assist in such an application. 

Currently, following RDA 2.5.1.5 and 2.5.1.6, such changes in edition statements are recorded in general notes (field 500), if they are recorded.

Current practice:

[Imaginary serial: Description based on first issue, for 2005; issues for 2011- have a different edition statement that does not require a new description.]

245 00 $a XYZ guide to graduate programs in sustainable architecture.
250 ## $a North American edition.
500 ## $a Issues for 2011- have edition statement: U.S. and Canada edition.

Potential application of repeatable 250:

245 00 $a XYZ guide to graduate programs in sustainable architecture.
250 ## $3 2005-2010: $a North American edition.
250 ## $3 2011- : $a U.S. and Canada edition.

2.2.3. Examples of usage for books

Example 1, two separate edition statements found on the cover

Current practice:

250 ## $a Canadian ed., 3rd ed. revised and updated

Potential application of repeatable 250:

250 ## $a Canadian ed.
250 ## $a 3rd ed. revised and updated

Example 2, a different resource, two separate edition statements found on the title page

Current practice:

250 ## $a Canadian ed., 3rd ed.

Potential application of repeatable 250:

250 ## $a Canadian ed.
250 ## $a 3rd ed.

Example 3, two separate edition statements found on the verso of the title page

Current practice:

250 ## $a Annotated teacher’s ed., 2nd ed.

Potential application of repeatable 250:

250 ## $a Annotated teacher’s ed.
250 ## $a 2nd ed.

3. PROPOSED CHANGES

Enable field 250 in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format to accommodate separately the various types of edition statement recorded according to RDA 2.5.2.1 by implementing the following changes:

3.1. Make the 250 repeatable.

3.2. Define subfield code $3 Materials Specified (NR).


HOME >> MARC Development >> Proposals List

The Library of Congress >> Especially for Librarians and Archivists >> Standards
( 03/07/2013 )
Legal | External Link Disclaimer Contact Us