Friday, January 26, 2007

Question

Maybe I should ask this on AUTOCAT but....

When I find a typo or misspelling in an item's title I use "i.e." to supply the correct word and then create 2 246s. One with the title as on the item and the other with the correct spelling. I have not been doing anything other than using "i.e." and supplying the correct word when it occurs in subfield b. Is this enough?

4 comments:

Peter said...

Seems like if you i.e. it, it doesn't need an added entry, like it does when you sic it (which I prefer).

1. Book of markteing [i.e. marketing]

2. Book of markteing [sic] (+ added entry)

3. Book of marketing [!] (+ general note, t.p. spells marteing)

David said...

Peter, I'd have to disagree. If I have the Book of markteing [i.e. marketing] and advertising a user looking for the Book of markteing and advertising, will not get a hit. We can hope they will be dropped into a browse list and see it there. Nor would the the user looking for the Book of marketing and advertising, get a hit. Keywords would work, but a title search either way would pose a problem.

Peter said...

Isn't that a bit farfetched to assume that the user searches for whole title including subfield b? I reasoned that subfield b would come into play during "words from title" searches, so that the correct word needed to be indexed somewhere (be it 245 or 246). People think I want too many added entries as it is :)

Kath Watson said...

Never underestimate the keenness of library users to input the entire title into a browse search box! I'm in an academic library, and we get a lot of students carefully keying in the entire title (plus author's middle name) from a reading list - I know this because it often goes horribly wrong for them when they get a word slightly wrong in the middle (if the academic had used a spine title, etc). I'd put in an added entry myself if I saw there wasn't one, and not just because I like cataloguing so much. :-)