Patricia Fogler wrote: > I'm seeing training that seems to emphasize the 77x fields but rarely > mentions the 130/240 fields in this context of new editions with title > changes. Is that because the use of the 130/240 fields are understood? > Doing both seems a bit redundant to me. > When would you & why, apply a 775 relator field? Would this be in > addition to the 240?
There is no redundancy. The 775 field is identifying the *related* resource--the other edition. The 100/240 (or 130, for "title main entry") is identifying the resource in hand. If the 240 or 130 happens to be identical to the 775 $t, that's because the same preferred title is used for both editions. But the fields are talking about two different resources. Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
