Closed joycebcat closed 9 years ago
robertzero
commented
10 years ago In most cases the conversion can ignore ISBD punctuation, but this is a case where the punctuation preceding the 245 $b is essential. ":" means subtitle(s) and "=" means parallel titles.
Did it convert the parallel titles correctly from the 246, second indicator 1?
ntra00
commented
10 years ago Coming back to this. According to 246 documentation, each parallel title in 245$b is recorded also in 246: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd246.html Is that the case? If so, it'll be much easier to handle, just suppressing the 245 $b and chopping the "=".
robertzero
commented
10 years ago Unfortunately, it's historically complicated.
There was a big Monographs-Serial split. For serials, we were using 246s for all variant or parallel titles relating to the resource. But for monos., we were putting those tiles in 740 fields, with 500 notes. This changed (I think in 1993) when the 740 was redefined and mono. catalogers began using 246 for parallel and variant titles. Thus in older cataloging you see parallel titles in 740s.
If a record has a 246, second indicator "1" then, yes, you can assume that is the parallel title. But not all parallel titles will be in 246s for some older catalog records.
From the MARC documentation:
"In 1993, field 740 was redefined. Prior to that time, the name of the field was "Added Entry-Variant Title." The field contained a form of the title that was different from the title proper portion of the title statement (field 245, subfields $a, $n, and $p) but that was not the uniform title for the work, in addition to the titles currently appropriate for field 740. With the redefinition of this field, varying forms of the title in field 245 are to be recorded in field 246 (Varying Form of Title), and field 740 is to be limited to uncontrolled titles that are related to the title in field 245 or to uncontrolled titles for works contained in the item."
joycebcat
commented
10 years ago Robert is right about the change in practice about where the parallel title is recorded outside the 245 field. Chopping out the parallel data in the 245 field might be an acceptable solution (there would be a loss of some data as the parallel subtitle and statement of responsibility probably don't appear elsewhere in the record). If you go with this approach, you can't lose sight of an issue I tried to convey in my original message -- the placement of the "=" changes in the 245 field depending on how much data is provided in the parallel language, and it does not necessarily fall into the subfield b--you can't simply drop the subfield b.
See these which represent some of the different ways the 245 can appear:
English title : |b English subtitle / |c English statement of responsibility = Arabic title : Arabic subtitle / Arabic statement of responsibility.
English title = |b Arabic title / |c English statement of responsibility. (like example 1)
English title : |b English subtitle = Arabic title : Arabic subtitle / |c English statement of responsibility. (like example 2)
English title / |c English statement of responsibility = Arabic title / Arabic statement of responsibility (like example 3)
ntra00
commented
10 years ago Ok, I made it so if there's an = in 245a, that's the end of the title, and 245b is a parallel title. (example 2 above). It will take more work to find the = in $b and $c and handle that all correctly.
ntra00
commented
9 years ago I'm detecting the = in $b now., and testting for = in $c as well. I think I've handled all of Joyce's cases above, and we're accounting for 246 ind2=1
The parallel title from the 245 field is converted differently depending on its context in the original MARC field. The = sign is not considered in evaluating the field. Thus the data is put into subtitle or statement of responsibility depending on the structure of the 245.
example 1:
example 2:
example 3: