Archive for February, 2009

The Significance of the Subfield w

Thursday, February 19th, 2009

One of the things we’re asked about occasionally is what the meaning of a $w (subfield w) is in See References in Authority Records (4XX tags). We hope this will help explain what the $w does.

The $w is a control subfield with up to four character positions. One-character alphabetic codes are used to describe special instructions that apply to the display of 4xx and 5xx fields. The definitions of the codes in subfield $w are dependent on the character position in which they occur. The coding of any character position mandates that each preceding character position contains a code or a fill character (|); succeeding character positions need not be used. For example, if $w/0 and $w/1 are not applicable but $w/2 is applicable, then $w/0 and $w/1 each contain code n (Not applicable) or a fill character (|). The n is used more often than the fill character.

We will use the following positions and codes to identify the references that our process adds to the LC authority records.

/2 – Earlier form of heading. We will use either of the following codes depending on which authority file (LC, MeSH, etc.) we found the former heading in.

  • e – Earlier established form of heading (national authority file) – We will use this for headings found in the LC Authority File
  • o – Earlier established form of heading (other authority file) – This will be used for headings found in other authority files.

/3 – Reference display. The following codes will be applicable in our process.

  • a – Reference not displayed
  • n – Not applicable – reference would display (If code n is applicable, subfield $w/3 need not be coded.)

Client libraries will be able to choose if they would like these added references to display or not and we will code the added reference accordingly.

$5 – Institution to which Field Applies. This subfield contains the MARC code of the institution or organization that has added a tracing, reference, or linking entry field to an authority file record. It is used for institution-specific information that may or may not apply to the universal use of the authority record.
We will identify these added references by adding a $5 with our institution code to them. i.e. $5UtOrBLW

So, a sample 4xx from a match made by our new process for a client that does NOT want the reference to display would look like:

4xx 0 $wnnea$aSome subject$xSubfield too$5UtOrBLW

It could look like this if they did want the reference to display:

4xx 0 $wnne$aSome subject$xSubfield too$5UtOrBLW

For more infomation on $w and $5, see the MARC21 Authority Format under the Tracings and References-General Information section at the following link:

Open Ended Subject Dates

Thursday, February 5th, 2009

What do you do with open ended subject dates, when the Library of Congress has created authorities with closed dates and no open ended see references? This was the question we sought to answer over the last week.

Take for example, you have a bib record with the following heading:
650 _0 $aWorld politics$y1955-

The authority for this heading has the following authorized and see references:

sh 85148226
150 _0 $aWorld politics$y1955-1965

Although these records are related, in an automated process they wont be linked, and the ending date will not be supplied. We decided there had to be a better way to link these up, and the process wasn’t very difficult, in fact, we’ve been doing it for names forever!

The answer is in the hierarchy. If we allowed our hierarchy system to include the closing date for subjects, we could provide the open ended bib dates a form of hierarchy to match against.

In essence, our Authority record above would create 2 possible heading matches. They would be (after following our normalization routine):
$aWORLD POLITICS$1955-1965
$aWORLD POLITICS$1955-

Now your bib heading $aWorld politics$y1955- could match and update against the proper LC Authority record. When we started researching this, we discovered another caveat. In some cases there are 2 authorities, one with an open ended date and one with a closed date. Our conclusion is that it’s obviously better in this case to trust what the original cataloger selected and match the open ended authority, rather than the closed authority. An example of this would be the authorities:
sh 85007061
151_0$aArgentina$xPolitics and government$y1810-
sh 85007060
151_0$aArgentina$xPolitics and government$y1810-1817

In this case, our bib record heading of 651 _0 $aArgentina$xPolitics and government$y1810- would match the first Authority.

After figuring that out, we discovered a real surprise, headings that were exactly the same, but had different closing dates. For example, France — History — 1789 has the following Authorities:

sh 85051348
151_0$aFrance$xHistory$y1789-
sh 85051347
151_0$aFrance$xHistory$y1789-1900
sh 85051346
151_0$aFrance$xHistory$y1789-1815
sh 85051314
151_0$aFrance$xHistory$y1789-1793

Obviously there are different meanings for different time periods starting from 1789. Now, if the bib record had an open ended date, it would take the open ended authority. And, if the bib record had any of the closed dates, it would take the authority with the matching date.

Our focus here, has been making sure that open ended authorities take the best possible match, and if there are no open ended authorities, matching it to the correct closed date authority, without creating false positive results.