One issue that has not yet been brought up in this discussion has been the 
recent revision approved by the JSC to change the way Field of Activity is 
recorded, and to eliminate this element as a possible addition to 
authorized access points, thus creating more possibilities of needing an 
undifferentiated name.

The revised examples will show that you record the name for the field of 
activity rather than the name for the class of persons engaged in that 
activity, e.g.

Stamp collecting vs. Stamp collector
Folklore vs. Folklorist
Anthropology vs. Anthropologist

Having the ability to add class of persons terms that do not represent an 
occupation or profession would reduce the number of undifferentiated 
names.  Or should we even care that the field of activity term is not in a 
class of persons form, but be able to use it as a qualifier anyway?  For 
example:

Smith, John $c (Stamp collecting)

Or perhaps the scope of the Profession or Occupation element could be 
enlarged so that it could include classes of persons that don't represent 
a profession or occupation?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax
[log in to unmask]
http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~