The 678 field was not used in NACO records done under AACR2. If you look
at the old MARC 21 Authority: LC Guidelines ("Blue Pages") for this field
it was marked as: "NACO: Do not use this field." The LC Guidelines are
now revised and say: "NACO: May be supplied in a NAR coded 008/10 c or z."
So, the 678 can now be used for AACR2 or RDA records, but this is only a
very recent change, and you won't find the examples in the MARC
documentation in name authorities.
Here's a family name in RDA that has a 678: no2012067728 Romanov (Dynasty
Adam L. Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
(206) 685-8782 fax
[log in to unmask]
On Wed, 23 May 2012, Ian Fairclough wrote:
> PCCLIST readers,
> Although the MARC 21 Format for Authority Data gives an example of usage of field 678 Biographical or Historical
> Data, I am not aware of actual usage in name authority records. The example is:
> 678 1# $aThe Office of Geography provides research and other staff services for the interdepartmental Board on
> Geographic Names and the Secretary of the Interior on foreign geographic nomenclature.$bThe Office inherited
> functions and records of earlier boards and committees engaged in similar work. The earliest of these, the U.S.
> Board on Geographic Names, was created by an Executive order of September 4, 1890, to ensure uniform usage
> throughout the executive departments of the Government ...
> I searched "Office of Geography" in the NAF and retrieved 15 NARs, but none of them had a 678 field. The one that
> looked like it might have been the basis for the example, "United States. ?bOffice of Geography", had this note:
> 667 The Division of Geography was created in the Dept. of the Interior in 1947. In 1955 the division was renamed
> Office of Geography. In Mar. 1968 the functions of the Office of Geography were transferred to the Geographic Names
> Division of the Army Map Service (after Jan. 16, 1969, Army Topographic Command).
> So field 667, a Non-Public General Note, was used rather than field 678, rather than field 678, which under Field
> Definition and Scope has: "Usually written in a form adequate for public display."
> Did field 678 simply go out of fashion? Has there been a technical reason for its non-use? And are there in fact
> any systems which could take advantage of such a note to display to the public? (Not that they would, if there
> aren't any 678 notes in any NARs to display!)
> Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - [log in to unmask]