LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCLIST Archives


PCCLIST Archives

PCCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST Home

PCCLIST  August 2012

PCCLIST August 2012

Subject:

Re: undifferentiated corporate name authorities

From:

Chris Baer <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 17 Aug 2012 12:02:27 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

To address this part of the issue, it depends entirely upon exactly who ones patrons are, exactly what type of information they are seeking, and what type of information and service you have to offer.

If, for example, you are doing genealogical or biographical research on persons who are not professional authors or on members of families where the same names are repeated generation after generation, then birth and death dates are practically essential, especially when dealing with unpublished or unique sources.  If you are looking for best sellers, reading assignments for class, or anything where the person is well-known (for the time being), then they are probably a nuisance.

The same thing holds true for corporate names.  If you are seeking information for administrative, legal, or other professional purposes, again, particularly in primary sources, it might be desirable to know which of the family of Pittsburgh Coal Companies actually mined coal in Pennsylvania and which operated a storage yard in Wisconsin, or that the pre-1930 Waldorf-Astoria Hotel was an entirely different building about a half mile away from the post 1934 building of the same name. 

It is actually true for SARs as well, which are largely generated by what people are writing monographs about and which lack the precision helpful to persons looking for work-related, precise information, for example, on all sorts of specific models of aircraft, computers, automobiles, firearms, etc.  A person looking for photos, plans and specs of the Metroliners of 1969-83 will not care about the TGV or the Acela, which are several generations of technology later, yet all are lumped in SAF under "high speed trains."  I just finished the description for a 1,000 linear foot archive of a famous interior decorator, who happened to be gay, yet while there are headings for gay people in some occupations, there is no heading for "gay interior decorators."  The same for other combinations of type of person and occupation.

We happen to have the finest collection of French Revolutionary pamphlets on this side of the Atlantic.  They used to be carefully periodized, until someone somewhere decided that there would be a single heading for the entire decade, so we were obliged to throw about 1,000 titles into the same SAR pot, a considerable disservice to our patrons and reference staff, but not so much when you only have a handful of monographs.

Describing and providing easy access to items in a "library" of several thousand unpublished technical or professional reports is a very different kettle of fish from categorizing and retrieving published serials, even when they may be artificial compilations of the same type of thing. 

Christopher T. Baer
Assistant Curator
Manuscripts & Archives
Hagley Museum and Library
P.O. Box 3630
Greenville, DE 19807-0630


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of CHRISTOPHER WALKER
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 10:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] undifferentiated corporate name authorities

Re-opening only to amend: 

Personal name headings distinguished by birth/death dates, are, of course, frequently useful to patrons and information seekers, especially for relatively common names where a date range can offer a place to start winnowing the index.  

Corporate name headings and SARs, not so much. 

CW 

----- Original Message -----
From: "CHRISTOPHER WALKER" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 9:53:26 AM
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] undifferentiated corporate name authorities

I can't agree with my distinguished colleague (Hi, Kevin!).
  
I am having trouble imagining any scenario under which any patron or information seeker will find it useful to encounter separate headings that recognize a distinction between otherwise identical headings that have the same corporate subordination.  

We seem to be headed into an era when the master authority record will be expected to evolve into an encyclopedia entry presenting all sorts of information that is not essential for distinguishing similar names (such as the gender associated with a personal name, or geographical associations that change during a person's career).
When I was NACO-trained, the impulse to do that was beaten out of me, but so be it. 
 
In an RDA-inflected file, maintaining two separate headings for South Dakota's Department of [Topic] seems unreasonable. 
Notes could convey the date information. 

Users have always been confused by authorized access points that include dates. In my view, strenuous care should be taken to find some other solution, any other solution, to distinguish otherwise identical headings. 
The idea that such headings might proliferate under the new code is profoundly depressing. 



Christopher H. Walker
Serials Cataloging Librarian
Penn State's representative to the CONSER Operations Committee Chair, Ulrichs Serials Librarianship Award Jury, 2011/2012
126 Paterno Library
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802-1812
(814) 865-4212
[log in to unmask]

  

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin M Randall" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 7:32:20 PM
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] undifferentiated corporate name authorities

Care must be taken not to confuse two different kinds of situations:

	1.  One corporate body has changed its name, taking up a name that it has used itself at a previous time

	2.  Two or more different corporate bodies have used the same name

In the case of South Dakota Department of Public Safety, these are two different bodies, one of which was created in 1973 and abolished in 1984, the other of which was created in 2003.  It would be incorrect to use the same heading for the two different bodies.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Bibliographic Services Dept.
Northwestern University Library
1970 Campus Drive
Evanston, IL  60208-2300
email: [log in to unmask]
phone: (847) 491-2939
fax:   (847) 491-4345


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
> Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 4:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [PCCLIST] undifferentiated corporate name authorities
> 
> RDA 11.13.1.5 says that when constructing access points for corporate 
> bodies, "If the name has been used by two or more bodies that cannot 
> be distinguished by place or associated institution, add a date or 
> dates associated with the body." It includes in the examples:
> 
> South Dakota. Department of Public Safety (1973-1984) South Dakota. 
> Department of Public Safety (2003- )
> 
> There's no LCPS comment.
> 
> AACR2 practice as codified in LAC RI (not discussed in LCRI) generally 
> used a single authority in such cases: "If a change in name results in 
> the resumption of an earlier form of name used by the same body, and a 
> heading has already been established for that name, do not establish a 
> new heading. Revise explanatory and other references as required, and 
> use the previously established name as the heading for new 
> publications issued under that same name." (LAC RI 24.1C)
> 
> Our case in point is the "New Brunswick. Dept. of Fisheries," name 
> used 1963-1971, 1975-1988, and 2006-2010.  Currently the first two 
> intervals are represented by a single AACR2/DLC authority and the 
> third interval could be added to it; but these all would presumably 
> need to be distributed into three date-qualified authorities for RDA.
> 
> Should all three RDA authorities be new and the AACR2 authority be 
> deleted, since none of the new authorized access points will be co- 
> extensive with what's represented by the AACR2 heading, or should the 
> existing authority record be revised to become one of the RDA 
> authorities?
> 
> Should a 667 note or some other indication be added to the RDA 
> authorities explain the difference between the AACR2 and RDA 
> treatments of the name and what it represents?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Stephen
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
> Technical Services, University Libraries University of Minnesota
> 160 Wilson Library
> 309 19th Avenue South
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
> Ph: 612-625-2328

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager