Thomas Brenndorfer wrote: > That does seem to be a weak spot in the current draft Bibframe mapping > for some elements, such as Instance Title: > http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html > > where 245$a is mapped, but 245$a $n $p are the three subfields that > make up the title proper.
That's an age-old problem with library systems, that has irked me to no end. For instance, in OCLC index displays, or in the Voyager indexes that specify "title proper" only, they use 245 $a, and entirely ignore $n and $p, which are integral parts of the title proper. It makes life very difficult at times! Actually, I would be perfectly happy to see 245 $n and $p made obsolete, moving the data into into 245 $a. That would make more sense to me, instead of trying to get everybody and all systems in the world to understand that the display or indexing of a title proper is incomplete if it's leaving out $n and $p. I don't see any positive functionality of the separate subfielding; there only seems to be a negative effect. Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
