[DCRM-L] Who still uses 245$h, or wishes they could?

[Erin Blake]

In answer to Brittney's question, it's not so much that we've "chosen" 245$h over 245$k  as that we haven't stopped doing what we've always done: our old OPAC was configured to search 245$h as a drop-down option in Advanced search, and people made good use of it (in fact, in a Zoom talk at Penn on Monday, Peter Stallybrass told people to type "realia" into the Folger catalog to find cool things -- researchers using cataloging jargon with other researchers!).

For newly cataloged manuscripts, we've been using both $h and $k -- we only use "manuscript" in $k if it's a handwritten document, so it doesn't always look redundant (for example, Letter from Edgar Lee Masters, Chicago, to William Stanley Braithwaite, Cambridge, Mass. [manuscript] : signed typescript, 6 April 1916.)

We use DCRM(G) when cataloging graphic materials, and 245$h is still a thing with 040$e dcrmg, so we haven't considered using $k there. And if we did use it, I'm sure we'd bracket it in transcribed titles.

That being said, the MARC standard sure makes it sound like $k is only to be used for mixed material and collections. What's up with that?
245 - Title Statement (NR)
FIELD DEFINITION AND SCOPE

Title and statement of responsibility area of the bibliographic description of a work.

Title Statement field consists of the title proper and may also contain the general material designation (medium), remainder of title, other title information, the remainder of the title page transcription, and statement(s) of responsibility. The title proper includes the short title and alternative title, the numerical designation of a part/section and the name of a part/section.

For mixed material, the title statement is defined as the name by which the material is known. The field may contain inclusive dates (subfield $f) and bulk dates (subfield $g) pertaining to a collection. For collections with no formal bibliographic title, subfield $k (Form) is used. Subfield $k may also be used to indicate "form" even if a formal title is given in subfields $a, $b, and $c.
Curiouser and curioser.

Erin

From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>> On Behalf Of Washington, Brittney via DCRM-L
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2024 11:54 AM
To: DCRM Users' Group <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Cc: Washington, Brittney <wasb at upenn.edu<mailto:wasb at upenn.edu>>
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] Who still uses 245$h, or wishes they could?

Hi Erin,

At my previous institution and the one I’m at now we use the $k to indicate the form for manuscripts and other non-book materials and that seems to do the trick as far replacing the usefulness of the $h. That being said, when I was preparing to respond to you I took a look at what exactly the difference between the $h and the $k is and I’m confused about the distinction. My life kind of flashed before my eyes for a minute there worrying I’ve been using the $k incorrectly all these years so I’m curious - is there any particular reason why y’all have chosen $h over $k?

Brittney


Brittney Washington
Rare Book Cataloging Coordinator
Kislak Center for Special Collections, Rare Books and Manuscripts
University of Pennsylvania



From: DCRM-L <dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu>> On Behalf Of Erin Blake via DCRM-L
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2024 1:23 PM
To: DCRM-L (dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>) <dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu>>
Cc: Erin Blake <EBlake at FOLGER.edu<mailto:EBlake at FOLGER.edu>>
Subject: [DCRM-L] Who still uses 245$h, or wishes they could?

Hello! I'm curious to know if others out there still use MARC 245$h locally in order to display GMD. Alternatively, if you've dropped 245$h, do you wish you could have continued to use it?

Even though AACR2's General Material Designation went away with RDA, the subfield still exists in the the MARC standard (as 245$h - Medium) and we find it handy at the Folger. We have lots of manuscripts, art, and objects in the collection, and 245h allows people skimming lists of titles to tell that the title doesn't belong to a book.

For example, four similar-looking titles (two manuscripts and two printed books):

•            Letter from Elizabeth I, Queen of England, Greenwich, to Don Ferdinando de'Medici, Grand-Duke of Tuscany [manuscript], 1594 September 9.

•            A letter from M. Voltaire to the French Academy : containing an appeal to that society on the merits of the English dramatic poet Shakespeare

•            Letter from the committee of Ulster Volunteers to the Duke of Richmond...

•            Letter from the heirs of Cappioni to Bartholomeo Corsini in London [manuscript], 31 October 1586.

Also, our OPAC isn't currently configured to display an icon based on the LDR/06, so in the context of the search results screen, 245$h is the only way to tell  manuscripts, still images, maps, etc. from printed text.

Thanks,

Erin

_____________________
Erin Blake, PhD
Senior Cataloger
eblake at folger.edu<mailto:eblake at folger.edu> | pronouns: she/her
Folger Shakespeare Library | 201 E Capitol Street SE, Washington, DC 20003
www.folger.edu<https://url.us.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/8o0rCKr73GUXGNwcv-rrz?domain=urldefense.com>
[Folger logo]


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20240322/5571e324/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3814 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20240322/5571e324/attachment-0001.png>