Append name of part to title

[nielserik]

UC has asked if name-of-part (245$p) could be appended to the title since $p is sometimes the only distinguishing element of multiple titles that are otherwise identical.

I suppose extending the title like that would be fine with other institutions; do you have an opinion about that @maccabeelevine ?

[maccabeelevine]

No opinion here, I don't know the MARC well enough. I will ask the folks here who use it...

[nielserik]

No opinion here, I don't know the MARC well enough. I will ask the folks here who use it...

No problem @maccabeelevine. I'm pretty sure adding $p will be fine but let's see if you hear something else and I can move it to the "chi" mapping.

We have more UC mapping requests coming, if you want to ask about them too while you're at it:

• Map Instance resource type from 336, like "text":
  =336 \$atext$btxt$2rdacontent$0http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/contentTypes/txt
• Map Instance format from 337 "--" 338, like "unmediated -- volume": =337 \$aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia$0http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/mediaTypes/n =338 \$avolume$bnc$2rdacarrier$0http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/carriers/nc
• Map Instance.languages from 041$a
• Map Instance.editions from 250$a
• Map Instance.series from 490
• Map 880 where the $6 begins with 245 to the Variant title type of Instance.alternativeTitles
• Map 880 where the $6 begins with 100 to Instance.contributors
• Set holdingsRecord.holdingsTypeId (to physical or electronic)

Am I right that all of these are generic enough that Lehigh would want them too - or not oppose them?

Finally there's one that might be UC specific (?):

• Default Item.copyNumber to "c.1"

[maccabeelevine]

Lisa agrees: "245$p is valid and should be accepted by the validation part of the tool - yes"

[lmccoll44]

The items on the list with bullet points are all fine - yes - generic enough.

We do not use copy numbers at Lehigh so we would not want that field to populate on import, but because we don't use them, they are not included in our import info, so that addition would probably not affect us unless you're proposing that to be an automatic default.