Saturday, December 20, 2014

Correct Coding of ISBN in MARC21 field 020 in RDA & AACR2 Cataloging with Examples



Several years ago the definition of $z of the 020 (International Standard Book Identifier) was expanded—it is now used for “structurally invalid” ISBNs (those that are too short, too long, wrong check digit, etc.) and also for “application invalid” ISBNs (ISBNs for a manifestation that would be described in a different bibliographic record).

The LC-PCC Policy Statement for 2.15.1.7 provides the following instruction:  
Record ISBNs in $z (Canceled/invalid) of MARC field 020 if they clearly represent a different manifestation from the resource being cataloged and would require a separate record (e.g., an ISBN for the large print version, e-book, or teacher’s manual on the record for a regular trade publication). If separate records would not be made (e.g., most cases where ISBNs are given for both the hardback and paperback simultaneously), or in cases of doubt, record the ISBNs in $a (International Standard Book Number) of MARC field 020

Please remember to use $z for ISBNs when appropriate. For regular print publications, this is most likely to occur when you also have an ISBN for a large print edition or e-book that would be cataloged on a separate record.

When we do not use the correct subfield code in field 020, systems that receive records from LC may incorrectly merge or replace records for the wrong format—we have received several complaints about this, and we hope we can improve the situation with your help.

[Source: Dave Reser, Library of Congress, Policy and Standards Division] 

<<<<<---------->>>>>

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION & ACCESS RDA


Question: Record ISBNs in 020 $z if they represent a different manifestation from the resource being cataloged.

  • If a printed monograph presents different ISBNs for different manifestation, do we have to transcribe them like below given example?


AACR2            020 $a 9780415692847 (hardback: alk. paper)
                                        020 $a 9780203116852 (e-book)

RDA                020 $a 9780415692847 (hardback: alk. paper)
                                      020 $z 9780203116852 (e-book)   (recorded in $z ISBN clearly representing an e-book version of the same manifestation)

Answer: Yes, the example you have given shows LC’s practice documented in LC PCC PS 2.15.1.7 for multiple ISBN:

“…if they clearly represent a different manifestation from the resource being cataloged and would require a separate record (e.g., an ISBN for the large print version, e-book, or teacher’s manual on the record for a regular trade publication). If separate records would not be made (e.g., most cases where ISBNs are given for both the hardback and paperback simultaneously), or in cases of doubt, record the ISBNs in $a”

<<<<<---------->>>>>


See Also: RDA Blog Labels (Categories) in below links for posts on related information on treatment of ISBN in RDA.


<<<<<---------->>>>>









David Bigwood

12 hours ago  -  Shared publicly
While not part of the question and answer it would be nice to show subfield q being used. 


RDA                020 $a 9780415692847 $q (hardback: alk. paper)

                                      020 $z 9780203116852 $q (e-book) 



<<<<<---------->>>>>










Sasha Birman
Yesterday 4:29 PM
+
1
0
1
 
Reply

We use both fields, 440 is former series field. 490 is very current.







<<<<<---------->>>>>


Sasha Birman
Yesterday 4:29 PM

We use both fields, 440 is former series field. 490 is very current.

                           <<<<<---------->>>>>



See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):