> From: David Van Hoy <[log in to unmask]>
> The revision calls for two different practices for NARs for newly
> established ongoing conferences. For serial records the current
> practice of a single authority record would continue. For monograph
> records a new policy--a separate NAR for each conference
> heading--would apply. Further, the "Note" seems to imply that either
> one policy or the other should apply to each ongoing conference.
As a sort of tangent from part of David Van Hoy's comments on LC/NACO
and LC/CONSER practice on this topic, when first reading the proposed
revision, I had assumed that all conferences would have the general
record for the conference plus the specific records for particular
numbers of the conference. Why isn't this like other hierarchies
where you must have NAF records for the parent or place name that is
used in a record for another heading?
The issue of set versus analytic records also affects multipart
monographs, of course. LC/CONSER may try to resolve the
duplication between serials and monographs, but this duplication will
continue to exist between multipart monographs and the
individual monographic parts.
Sherman Clarke - NYU - [log in to unmask]