On the authority control/record vendor/local system debate:
We have an Innopac system and our authority control is outsourced to MARS, in the sense that we send our bibliographic records off to them in quarterly batches, they look for headings not previously matched in the LC and MeSH authority files, supply corresponding authority records if they exist, update headings in the bibliographic batch if necessary to be in line with the authorities, and return the whole lot to us for overlaying (bibliographics) or loading (new authorities).
MARS also keep track of authority records already supplied, and if any have been amended at source, send the updated version. We then overlay.
Our Innopac build includes Automatic Authority Control Processing, and, as we have set it up, if a 4xx is present in the amended authority, the 4XX bounces into corresponding bibliographic records and updates headings. Our problem is that LC topical and MeSH authorities retain older forms in 4XX; LC names (and subject names) don't do that. So I have to check through MARS reports and make manual amendments in bibliographics.
I would welcome death dates being added either to 667 or to 100, but with the proviso that Innopac AACP would make use of the old heading being retained in 400 - probably not a very welcome proposal.
Cataloguing Services Manager
215 Euston Road
London NW1 2BE
[log in to unmask]
The Wellcome Trust is a registered charity, no.210183.
Its sole Trustee is the Wellcome Trust Limited, a company
registered in England, no. 2711000, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London NW1 2BE.