On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 19:32:10 +0000, Jessica Janecki <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>It's in the personal name FAQ not to add cross references for headings with incorrect dates. Except that people like them because they aid in string matching based authority control.
Ah, so it is, #12: "When changing a heading coded AACR2 because dates were recorded inaccurately or a cataloger entered a typo in the heading, etc., do not add the inaccurate form as a cross reference."
I looked at the FAQ, but missed that. But I note that technically, it only says not to add the reference "when changing a heading *coded AACR2*." In this case, my heading was already coded RDA.
I seem to recall that there was once also an instruction not to add a reference when adding a death date to a heading with an open birth date. But there is an example of such a reference in the FAQ. See example 2 in #13 (which is however also worded to apply to situations where an "AACR2 NAR is evaluated and re-coded to RDA").
At any rate, as Jessica says, "people like [such references] because they aid in string matching based authority control." Does anyone remember a recent discussion on this or a related topic?
Looking at headings for people who died in 2019 and 2020 in the NAF, I note that some have the reference and some don't.
Another question: this FAQ also says (#9): "When dates are incorrect in any heading (1XX) of a NAR they should be changed to reflect the correct date(s) and BFM should be reported in order that headings on all bibliographic records are corrected." But by the "Guidelines for reporting NACO BFM" (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/naco/bfmguide.html), such changes fall under "one-to-one heading changes" and are therefore not reportable. Which is correct?
Rare Materials Cataloger
Special Collections/Special Formats Processing
The New York Public Library
Stephen A. Schwarzman Building
476 Fifth Avenue, Rm. 313, New York, NY 10018
[log in to unmask]
My opinions, not NYPL's