Do the NACO procedures now require that the Pinyin version be added as a see reference when the Chinese name is not Romanized by that scheme? Thanks for your help.
Evelyn Bain
Head, Cataloging Unit 1
Cataloging Section
National Library of Medicine
301-496-7137
[log in to unmask]
>>> [log in to unmask] 02/02/01 01:14PM >>>
Wade-Giles Cross References to Pinyin Headings
In the past, when a Chinese heading was established in a
romanised form other than Wade-Giles, the practice was, to add a cross
reference from the Wade-Giles romanisation when the Wade-Giles form
could be identified. This was an aid to catalog users who understood
that we worked within the framework of Wade-Giles romanisation, and
could legitimately expect to find a heading established in that form.
As we have now adopted pinyin as the standard for romanised
headings, this practice would have the effect of requiring NACO
libraries to add a Wade-Giles cross reference in every case. Since
pinyin is now understood to be the framework within which we work,
there is no longer any practical reason for adding Wade-Giles cross
references to newly created name authority records.
NACO libraries are asked to discontinue the practice of adding
Wade-Giles cross references to authority records in which the heading
is not in that form of romanisation.
|