Indexing and Display Recommendations for Linking Fields (7XX): A Report to CPC

 

by

Diana Brooking, Kristin Lindlan, Deborah Pierce, Adam Schiff

 

April 10, 2003

 

Rationale for This Report and Charge

 

At the Cataloging Policy Committee meeting in November 2002, Steve Shadle and Adam Schiff presented an overview on the changes in the cataloging rules that would be implemented nationally on December 1, 2002.  Examples of links that would be made for integrating resources were shown, and a discussion was held about access to the data included in linking fields (see the next section for an explanation of linking fields).  There was overwhelming agreement that, at least in some cases, linking fields that are not currently indexed should be indexed so that users can search for a resource and retrieve the record that has the link to it.  For example, the database Bowker’s Books in Print includes not only the online version of Books in Print, but also several other resources such as the online versions of Children’s Books in Print and Forthcoming Books as well as Bowker’s Awards Database and Bowker’s Author Biography Database.  CPC members felt that someone ought to be able to do a title search on Children’s Books in Print or Bowker’s Awards Database and retrieve the record for Bowker’s Books in Print because that resource provides access to it.  Without indexing the linking fields, users will not retrieve the record for the electronic resource.

 

As a result of this discussion an ad hoc task group was set up by Joe Kiegel to examine all of the linking fields and to consider whether we should change our current indexing practices for them.  We were asked to consider the impact of any changes not just on the new category of integrating resources, but on traditional materials such as serials and monographs as well.  We met during the winter and spring of 2003 and our recommendations are given below.

 

Explanation of Linking Fields

 

A linking entry describes publications that are related to the item that is being cataloged.  Linking fields allow the establishment of bibliographic connections among materials with diverse relationships.

 

Bibliographic relationships can be categorized into three types:

 

Chronological relationship. The relationship in time between bibliographic items (e.g., the relation of a serial to its predecessors and successors).

Horizontal relationship. The relationship between versions of a bibliographic item in different languages, format, media, etc.

Vertical relationship. The hierarchical relationship of the whole to its parts and the parts to the whole (e.g., a journal article to the journal or a subseries to a main entry series).

According to MARC standards and national cataloging practices, relationship notes for serials and integrating resources are encoded in linking fields.  The linking fields are MARC tags 760-787.  Each type of relationship is represented by a differently tagged linking field.  The linking entry fields are designed to generate a note in the record in which they appear.  They can also provide machine linkage between the bibliographic record for the item being described and the bibliographic record for a related item, if the related item is represented in the catalog by a separate record.

 

Background Information

 

In 2002, chapter 12 of AACR2 was revised to cover all types of continuing resources, including both serials and integrating resources.  Integrating resources are resources that are added to or changed by means of updates that do not remain discrete and are integrated into the whole.  Examples of integrating resources include updating loose-leafs and updating Web sites.  Serials, the other type of continuing resource, are resources issued in a succession of parts, usually bearing numbering, that have no predetermined conclusion.  Examples include magazines, scholarly journals, e-journals, annual reports, newspapers, and monographic series.

 

Rule 12.7B8 states to “make notes on the bibliographic history and on important relationships between the resource being described and the immediately preceding, immediately succeeding, or simultaneously issued resources.”  Examples of these relationships include continuations, mergers, splits, absorptions, translations, supplements, and simultaneous editions.  The bibliographic history and relationship notes called for in AACR2 are encoded in MARC in linking fields.

 

Until the 2002 revisions of AACR2 went into effect, most linking entries were made for serials.  With the inclusion of integrating resources in chapter 12, linking entries must now be made for them as well.  Links are made reciprocally between the record for the resource being described and the record(s) for the related resource(s).  Links are made for relationships between the following kinds of materials:

 

Serial  <---> Serial

Serial  <---> Integrating Resource

Serial  <---> Monograph

Integrating Resource <---> Serial

Integrating Resource <---> Integrating Resource

Integrating Resource <---> Monograph

 

Links are not generally made from monograph to monograph.

 

Linking entry fields are not intended to take the place of added entry fields.  Traditionally, if an added entry were needed, it would be made in addition to the linking fields.  However, in fall 2002, LC issued a new rule interpretation for 21.28B1:

 

LC/PCC practice for serials: Except for serial supplements to other serials and serials with relationships covered by rules 21.8-21.27, do not give an added entry for the related work.  Instead, make reciprocal linking notes (see 12.7B8).

 

LC/PCC practice for integrating resources: Except for integrating resources with relationships covered by rules 21.8-21.27, do not give an added entry for the related work.  Instead, make reciprocal linking notes (see 12.7B8).

 

Based on LCRI 21.28B1, the only serials or integrating resources that would seem likely to be covered by 21.8-21.27 would be translations and perhaps modifications, adaptations, and revisions.  For all other relationships other than serial supplements, no added entry is supposed to be given, only a linking note. 

 

Currently, information recorded in linking notes is not searchable in our online catalog’s author and title phrase indexes, nor, in most cases, in the keyword index.  Some of these fields are hotlinked in the Web catalog, meaning that clicking on them will execute a title search of the title data found in the linking field.  However, because the data in linking fields are not actually indexed, these hotlinked searches will usually result in zero hits, unless the resource being linked to is also cataloged under that title in a separate bibliographic record.

 

The Linking Fields

 

The currently established linking fields in MARC 21 are:

 

760

Main Series Entry

762

Subseries Entry

765

Original Language Entry

767

Translation Entry

770

Supplement/Special Issue Entry

772

Supplement Parent Entry

773

Host Item Entry

774

Constituent Unit Entry

775

Other Edition Entry

776

Additional Physical Form Entry

777

Issued With Entry

780

Preceding Entry

785

Succeeding Entry

786

Data Source Entry

787

Nonspecific Relationship Entry

 

Current Indexing of Linking Fields

 

At the present time, four of the linking fields (777, 780, 785, 787) are indexed in the keyword index.  None of the fields are indexed in the author or title indexes.  Fields 765-787 are hotlinked to perform title searches in the Web catalog, i.e., a click on the linking field will execute a title search.  However, if the title isn’t indexed, then zero hits will be returned.  Hotlinking is hardwired by III and cannot be changed by us.

 

All but one of the established linking fields listed above has been used in our catalog (the exception is field 786).  The most common ones in our catalog are for preceding and succeeding entry for earlier and later titles of serials (780 and 785).  As integrating resources cataloging grows due to the number of Web sites and updating databases being cataloged, the use of other linking fields will increase (e.g., additional physical form entry (776), other edition entry (775)).  Succeeding and preceding entry will also now be made between integrating resources (e.g., one loose-leaf edition of a work being completely replaced by a new edition).

 

Summary of Recommended Indexing of Linking Fields

 

In most cases, we are recommending a new practice of indexing linking fields in the author and title browse indexes, as well as in the keyword index.  A few fields are already keyword indexed (indicated by an asterisk below), but none are currently in the browse  indexes.

 

760      No change in indexing recommended (do not index)

762      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

765      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

767      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

770      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

772      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

773      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

774      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

775      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

776      Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

777*    Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

780*    Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

785*    Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

787*    Index $a in author, $s and $t in title; index $a, $s, and $t in keyword

 

Detailed examples of each linking field, with justification for our indexing recommendations, follows below.

 

National Developments to Watch

 

The Program for Cooperative Cataloging’s Standing Committee on Automation (SCA) has been asked to investigate the ways that integrated library systems make use of linking entry fields and to make suggestions for possible improvements.  To accomplish this work, the SCA has created the Task Group on Linking Entries (http://www.loc.gov/

catdir/pcc/tglnkentr.html).  A progress report is to be submitted by the SCA meeting at ALA Annual meeting in Toronto, with the final report to follow no later than the 2004 ALA Midwinter meeting in San Diego.

 

Pros and Cons of Indexing

 

We believe that indexing linking fields will benefit users in many, but possibly not all, cases. We think that public services staff prefer to have more access to data deemed to be potentially useful, even at the risk of more false hits, rather than not have access to the data at all. This is the philosophy behind the very wide range of fields in the catalog’s advanced keyword index. However, even in the keyword index, some fields were not indexed. For example, the place of publication was not indexed based on the prediction that most users would be looking for materials about a location, rather than materials published in a location. This was a case where it seemed that the false hits would vastly outnumber the useful hits.

 

We believe that it is very difficult to make predictions when it comes to linking fields. The benefits of indexing linking fields could vary greatly depending on the circumstances surrounding the individual titles themselves.

 

The Four Unpredictabilities

 

  1. Do we actually own the related title in the linking field?
  2. Has the related title in the linking field been cataloged separately on its own record?
  3. Does the record with the related title in the linking field also have an added entry for the related title?
  4. What is the patron actually looking for?

 

For various reasons, we can’t know the answer to these questions in advance. Our group had no way of empirically determining, for example, how many of the linking fields actually represent titles that we own. Currently, a title search for Soviet Agricultural Biology pulls up nothing, because we do not own it. If a user were looking at the Russian record and clicked on the hotlinked linking field to Soviet Agricultural Biology, they would still get nothing. Under the proposal to include linking fields in the title index, users could do a title search on Soviet Agricultural Biology and find out that we do have the Russian version, which might conceivably be useful to them. But we still don’t own the English title and clicking on the hotlink would lead the user right back to the same record for the Russian resource. If we do own a related title (e.g., the former title Negro American Literature Forum), then currently both a title search and clicking on the hotlink will find the record for that title. Under the proposed indexing, a title search or a click on the hotlink would bring up two hits for the title--one for its own record (Negro American Literature Forum) and one for the related record (the later title Black American Literature Forum).

 

One might think, if we actually own a related title, then the title will have its own record and be in the title index anyway. But this is not true in all cases, and we have no way of knowing how many cases we are talking about. Local cataloging practices and treatment decisions have varied over time. Supplements are not always been cataloged separately. Records accepted in retrospective conversion projects can vary in completeness. In another case, an electronic resource Title A that is available separately in print, but is presented as an integrated part of the electronic hosting Title B, will not have a separate record in the catalog. Currently, a title search for Bowker’s Awards Database pulls up nothing, but we do have access to this title through the electronic Bowker’s Books in Print. Even if a user is looking at the record for Bowker’s Books in Print, clicking on the hotlinked linking field for Bowker’s Awards Database pulls up nothing in the title index and might lead the user to assume somehow we didn’t have access to this title. Under the proposed indexing, including the linking field in the title index would mean the users could find this electronic title through a title search. Clicking on the hotlink in the record for Books in Print would lead the user back to that same record, where the URL for connecting to Bowker’s Awards Database would be present.

 

Even if a related title in a linking field is not cataloged separately, there may already be an added entry for that related title in the host record. But we cannot predict the odds of this being true. Cataloging rules may or may not call for an added entry, and records (especially from retrospective conversion projects) may or may not have followed the rules. We know that linking fields do not always have a corresponding (and already indexed) added entry. More importantly, the new LCRI 21.28B1 calls for making even fewer added entries in the future. Currently, some of these related titles that are not cataloged separately can be found through added entries and some cannot.  Under this proposal, indexing linking fields would enable users to find them all. Indexing linking fields that already have corresponding added entries would not create duplicate index entries if the two fields are in fact identical (which they would usually be).

 

Finally, the most unpredictable element may be the user. Will a particular user be looking for a title represented in our catalog only by a linking field? If we don’t own that title, would the user be satisfied with the related title that the host record with the linking field represents? Does the user have an accurate citation? Some of our indexing and abstracting databases do not treat title changes in the same way that our catalog does. There are many cases where we can imagine that a user could be helped by having linking fields in our indexes. It is harder to predict how often users will not be satisfied with search results that don’t bring up exactly what they were looking for, but something related to what they were looking for (or indeed, search results that could bring up exactly what they were looking for, but could also bring up additional related titles).

 

Examples of Each Linking Field, With Indexing Recommendations

 

760  Main Series Entry

 

Example: The serial Forest Management Chemicals is in the main series Agriculture Handbook (United States. Dept. of Agriculture)

 

 

Current indexing of 760: none.  Links are not hotlinked.

 

Recommended indexing: none. Because a series added entry is made for the main series, there is no need to index the linking field.  This field is not generally being added to records any longer.


762  Subseries Entry

 

Example: The serial World Crude Oil Production Annual is a subseries within the serial Mineral Industry Surveys.

 

 

Current indexing of 762: none.  Links are not hotlinked.

 

There is not a separate record for World Crude Oil Production Annual in our catalog.  If a user searched on it they would think we didn’t own it.  In fact, we may own it since it is part of the serial Mineral Industry Surveys.  By indexing the linking field, users would retrieve the record for the parent and might at least figure out that they could go to the Engineering Library and browse through its holdings to see if we have what they need.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.

 


765  Original Language Entry

 

Example: Chinese Astronomy is a periodical that is a selected translation of Acta Astronomica Sinica.

 

 

Current indexing of 765: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

A user with a citation to the Chinese-language publication Acta Astronomica Sinica might be pleased to learn that we have a translation of it.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.

 


767  Translation Entry

 

Example: The Russian journal Selskokhoziaistvennaia Biologiia has been translated into two English journals: Soviet Agricultural Biology. Part 1, Plant biology and, Soviet Agricultural Biology. Part 2, Animal Biology.  We own the Russian journal but not the English translations.

 

 

Current indexing of 767: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

A user with a citation to Soviet Agricultural Biology might be able to use the original Russian version instead.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


770  Supplement/Special Issue Entry

 

Example: The journal Zeitschrift für Instrumentenkunde has several supplements, including Forschungen zur Geschichte der Optik and Deutsche Mechaniker-Zeitung.

 

 

Current indexing of 770: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

In some cases, supplements with their own titles may be cataloged separately on their own records, and in some cases, they may not.  Supplements may get shelved with the parent title, may be shelved separately (in this case there usually would be a separate record), may not be received at all, or may be discarded if they are deemed not worth retaining.  We haven’t cataloged Forschungen zur Geschichte der Optik separately, so if a user searches to see if we have it she won’t retrieve anything, even though it is possible that we do own it and that it is just shelved with its parent title.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


772  Supplement Parent Entry

 

Example 1:  Country Analyses of External Trade is a quarterly publication of the New Zealand Dept. of Statistics that is a supplement to Monthly Abstract of Statistics.

 

 


Example 2: Spectroscopic Properties of Inorganic and Organometallic Compounds is a supplement to Annual Reports on the Progress of Chemistry. Section B, Organic Chemistry.

 

 

Current indexing of 772: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

In most cases, an added entry would be made for the parent of a serial supplement, because this is called for by LCRI 21.28B1 (see above).  However, not all records contain these added entries (see example 2 in this section).  If we want a user who searches on Annual Reports on the Progress of Chemistry. Section B, Organic Chemistry to retrieve the record for its supplement, then the linking field in the supplement record must be indexed.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


773  Host Item Entry

 

This field is typically used for “in” analytics (see AACR2 13.5).  An “in” analytic is created when the item being cataloged is actually inside of some other resource (e.g., a periodical article being cataloged separately even though the article hasn’t been detached from the parent periodical).  This isn’t done very often, but it can be a useful technique some times.

 

In this library, we have “in” analytic records for some periodical articles for which we had printed cards in the old days, for some microforms, and for some archival and special collections where we’ve analyzed parts of the collections.  In addition, there are records in our catalog that are coded as “in” analytics incorrectly.  These can be attributed to retrospective conversion efforts, where the only record available in OCLC was an “in” analytic, even though that situation didn’t correctly describe the status of our copy of the item (e.g., an item that has been detached from a periodical and bound and cataloged separately).

 

Example 1: Archival “in” analytic: the videorecording of an oral history interview with Geraldine Siks is part of a collection of oral history interviews.

 


Example 2: “In” analytic for a journal included in an aggregator database.  The Houston Business Journal is available online as part of Proquest.

 

 

Example 3: “In” analytic for articles included in the Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature.

 


Example 4: “In” analytic of an article from a periodical, reproduced in microform.

 

 

Current indexing of 773: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

We think that it is desirable to allow users who search on the host item to pull up the records for the analytics that are in the host.  For example, if a user searches for the corporate body Arena Group Oral History Project or for the title Proquest she will not currently retrieve the records in examples 1 and 2 above.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


774  Constituent Unit Entry

 

Example: The online database Bowker’s Books in Print also includes online versions of Children’s Books in Print, Forthcoming Books, and Bowker’s Complete Video Directory.  In addition it has three resources that aren’t also in print: Bowker’s Author Biography Database, Bowker’s Awards Database, and Bowker’s Publisher Authority Database.  We own Children’s Books in Print in print, but only for 1969-1994.  We don’t own Forthcoming Books.  We haven’t created separate bibliographic records for the special databases included in Bowker’s Books in Print.

 

Current indexing of 774: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

A user searching for Children’s Books in Print would find that we owned it, but that we stopped receiving it in 1994.  If he searched for the Bowker Awards Database he would retrieve nothing.  If the linking fields were indexed, then the record for the database that contains Children’s Books in Print and Bowker Awards Database would also be retrieved and the note in the record would explain why.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


775  Other Edition Entry

 

Example: Biblical Theology Bulletin is published simultaneously in French as Bulletin de Théologie Biblique.

 

 

Current indexing of 775: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

We don’t own the French edition, but a user with a citation to it might be able to use the English edition instead.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


776  Additional Physical Form Entry

 

Example: Protected Areas Information is the electronic version of two print resources: Protected Areas of the World and United Nations List of National Parks and Protected Areas.  The first is a monograph, the second a serial.

 

 

Current indexing of 776: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

We would want a user who searches either the title of the monograph or the serial to also retrieve the record for the electronic version of them.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


777  Issued With Entry

 

Example 1: Issues for 1863-1877 of the newspaper The Friend include the Annual Report of the Hawaiian Evangelical Association.

 

 


Example 2: IGA news and Geothermal Technologies are included in some issues of the Bulletin (Geothermal Resources Council).

 

 

Current indexing of 777: included in keyword index only.  Links are hotlinked.

 

Users who search on the title that is issued inside another will not currently retrieve the record for the host title.  If the title inside is not separately cataloged (and many are not), they will not retrieve anything, even though we may actually own it as part of our collection of the host title.  By indexing the linking field, the host title will be retrieved, which may lead the patron to the desired item.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


780  Preceding Entry

 

Example 1: The Bulletin of NAMT became the Journal of Music Therapy.  We do not own the earlier title.

 

 

A user with a citation to Bulletin of NAMT currently would have to do a keyword search to find anything in our catalog, since that title is not currently indexed in the title index.  Although we do not own the Bulletin, the user might find its successor to be useful to them as well.


Example 2: The journals Accountancy Research and Accountancy International were absorbed into Accountancy.  Accountancy is the later title of Incorporated Accountants’ Journal.

 

 
Example 3: The print journal Performance Practice Review was continued by a Web site, Performance Practice Encyclopedia.

 

 

Someone who searches on the print title Performance Practice Review would probably be glad to learn of its Web-based successor.


Example 4: The updating loose-leaf publications USMARC Format for Bibliographic Data (1994 ed.) and Canadian MARC Communication Format for Bibliographic Data have been superseded by the 1999 ed. of another updating loose-leaf publication, MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data.

 

 

A user searching on the older publications should be made aware that they are obsolete and replaced by the newer loose-leaf.


Example 5 (hypothetical): The loose-leaf Regulations for Commercial and Residential Property was formed by the merger of two different loose-leafs, Regulations for Commercial Property and Regulations for Residential Property.

 

 

A user searching for one of the earlier titles would probably want to know that we owned the later version, since it is likely to be more up to date.

 

Current indexing of 780: included in keyword index only.  Links are hotlinked.

 

Because integrating resources and monographs are now going to be using the same earlier/later links as serials, we think that it would serve users to start indexing these fields.  In particular, indexing will allow users who search on an earlier title to learn that we own its successor.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


785  Succeeding Entry

 

Example 1: The journal The Linguist previously had the title The Incorporated Linguist, which itself was the successor of Linguists’ Review.

 

 

It is not uncommon for indexing and abstracting services to index an entire run of serial only under its latest title.  Patrons frequently look for something under its most current title when what they really need is the earlier title.  By indexing the succeeding entry linking field, the record for the earlier title will be retrieved by a search on the later title, which is likely to help users in this situation.


Example 2: The Web site Performance Practice Encyclopedia is a continuation of the print journal Performance Practice Review.

 

 

Someone searching on the title of the Web site might not realize that it first started out as a print journal.  They may wish to use the earlier print title as well.


Example 3: The updating loose-leaf MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data (1999 ed.) supersedes the 1994 ed. of the loose-leaf USMARC Format for Bibliographic Data.

 

 

Current indexing of 785: included in keyword index only.  Links are hotlinked.

 

Because integrating resources and monographs will be using the same earlier/later links as serials, we think that it would serve users to start indexing these fields.  Indexing will allow users who search on a later title to learn that we own its predecessor.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


786  Data Source Entry

 

This field contains information pertaining to a data source to which the described item is related.  It may contain information about other files, printed sources, or collection procedures, e.g., a statistical resource related to the production of a particular government document.

 

There are no current examples of this field on our database, but if we get or create records with this field, it should be indexed like the others.  A person searching on the title of a data source ought to retrieve the related resources that used the data from that source.

 

Current indexing of 786: none.  Links are hotlinked.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


787  Nonspecific Relationship Entry

 

This field is used when none of the other linking fields expresses the relationship between the resources.  The nature of the relationship is specified in the relationship complexity note field (580) or in the subfield $i note within the 787 field.

 

Example 1: The online database Amphibian Species of the World is based on two printed monographs, a book also called Amphibian Species of the World and a supplement published eight years later entitled Amphibian Species of the World. Additions and Corrections.

 

 

Although these titles are very similar, a user searching on the author Duellman would not retrieve the record for the Internet resource unless his linking entry is indexed.


Example 2: Volumes for 1969-   of the journal Geographische Rundschau have a companion journal called Lehrmittel Aktuell.

 

 

A user searching for Lehrmittel Aktuell might conceivably be interested to learn of its companion publication Geographische Rundschau.


Example 3: Sea Fisheries Statistical Tables begins in 1919/20 as a separate publication, but it was previously published from 1903-1911 in Annual Report of Proceedings Under Acts Relating to Sea Fisheries and from 1912-1915 as part 2 of Annual Report on Sea Fisheries.

 

 

A user with a citation to one of the earlier publications might also be happy to learn that further and later statistics on this topic are available in the separately issued later publication.


Example 4: Année stratégique includes a French version of the publication The Military Balance.

 

 

A user with a citation to Année stratégique might be able to use the English language The Military Balance instead.

 

Current indexing of 787: included in keyword index only.  Links are hotlinked.

 

Recommended indexing: Index author and title fields; include in keyword index.


Addendum on Display Labels in the Online Catalog

 

In addition to indexing recommendations, we have also determined that changes to the display labels for linking fields are desirable.  Currently, most of these have the display label text Link, but more useful and informative labels can be displayed.  In the process of doing our work, we discovered that the WebPAC can now display different labels based on indicator values used in the MARC fields.

 

We recommend changing the display labels for the following fields to the values listed below.  In the cases where the number of characters exceeds 12, we also provide a shorter form that we can use for our display.  We would like to urge IOG to request that III allow display labels of longer than 12 characters.

 

760      Main series

762      Includes subseries ŕ  Incl subser

765      Translation of ŕ  Translatn of

767      Has translation ŕ  Has transltn

770      Has supplement ŕ  Has suppl

772      Supplement to ŕ  Suppl to

773      Found in

774      Includes

775      Other edition ŕ  Other ed.

776      Other form

777      Issued with

786      Data source

787      Related to

 

The following displays are recommended based on the value in the second indicator:

 

780      ë0        Continues

780      ë1        Continues

780      ë2        Supersedes

780      ë3        Supersedes

780      ë4        Union of    [we would also be happy with Merger of]

780      ë5        Absorbed

780      ë6        Absorbed

780      ë7        Split from

785      ë0        Continued by

785      ë1        Continued by

785      ë2        Superseded by ŕ  Supersed by

785      ë3        Superseded by ŕ  Supersed by

785      ë4        Absorbed by

785      ë5        Absorbed by

785      ë6        Split into

785      ë7        Merger

785      ë8        Changed back to ŕ  Chgd back to