Catalogers are simply choosing to go beyond core requirements, which is 
fine.  Many probably think recording the copyright date in addition is 
useful information, although not required by RDA if a date of publication 
or distribution is recorded.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, Bellinger, Christina wrote:

> 
> Would someone please point me to the right documentation.  I have been looking for a reason why I see so many
> records with 2 264 fields when the publication date and the copyright date match.  The PCC guidelines say to do it,
> but I don?t know why.  I have looked through the RDA toolkit and the LCPS statements and can?t find anything that says
> that the copyright date field is required if the copyright date and the publication date are the same.  RDA 2.11
> says that copyright date is a core element if neither the data of publication nor the date of distribution is
> identified. LC practice is the same. 
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Christina Bellinger
> 
>  
> 
> Christina Bellinger
> 
> Access Services Librarian
> 
> University of New Hampshire LIbrary
> 
> 18 Library Way
> 
> Durham, NH 03824
> 
> 603 862-0073 (phone)
> 
> 603 862-0180 (fax)
> 
> [log in to unmask]
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Hostage
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 12:32 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
> Those are probably not the access points that most users in this country would prefer.  Russian-speaking users would
> presumably prefer access points in the original Cyrillic script.  I don?t think that standardization and
> internationalization are FRBR principles.  New tools like VIAF will make it less important for all communities to
> use the same access points.  Instead, they can be based on the needs of the users of the catalog.  Cf. Statement of
> International Cataloguing Principles, 6.3.2.1.1
> (http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/statement-of-international-cataloguing-principles)
> 
>  
> 
> ------------------------------------------
> 
> John Hostage
> 
> Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian
> 
> Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
> 
> Langdell Hall 194
> 
> Cambridge, MA 02138
> 
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> +(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
> 
> +(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larisa Walsh
> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 11:43
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
> ? It?s interesting that these names and others were given in systematically romanized form before AACR2:
> 
>  
> 
> Dostoevskii?, Fedor Mikhai?lovich, ?d1821-1881 ?wnna
> 
> Tolstoi?, Aleksei? Konstantinovich, ?cgraf, ?d1817-1875 ?wnna
> 
> Chai?kovskii?, Petr Il?ich, ?d1840-1893 ?wnna?
> 
>  
> 
> Precisely. That?s the headings Slavic community would have preferred.
> 
>  
> 
> When I read the mentioned  LCPS  9.2.2.5.3 I wonder how FRBR principles of standardization and internationalization
> fit in here?
> 
>  
> 
> Larisa
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Herrold, Charles
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 3:05 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
>     My apologies to all?I was thinking CJK and missed Cyrillic.  Larisa is correct.  The result is the same, however
> as far as names such as Tchaikovsky are concerned.  Expanding on that citation:
> 
>  
> 
> Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Cyrillic: Apply the alternative when the first element of the preferred name begins with
> either a given name or a surname. If a person is likely to appear in general English-language reference sources,
> search Academic American Encyclopedia, The Encyclopedia Americana, and the New Encyclopaedia Britannica. If the name
> is found in all three sources in a single form, use that form. If the form varies in these three sources, use the
> form found in New Encyclopaedia Britannica. If the name is not found in all three of these sources, use the
> systematically romanized form of the name
> 
>  
> 
>     It?s interesting that these names and others were given in systematically romanized form before AACR2:
> 
>  
> 
> Dostoevskii?, Fedor Mikhai?lovich, ?d1821-1881 ?wnna
> 
> Tolstoi?, Aleksei? Konstantinovich, ?cgraf, ?d1817-1875 ?wnna
> 
> Chai?kovskii?, Petr Il?ich, ?d1840-1893 ?wnna
> 
>  
> 
>       I?m guessing that?s what Slavic language catalogers would have preferred?
> 
> Chuck Herrold
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larisa Walsh
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 2:38 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
> Chuck,
> 
> for Russian names this paragraph should be used under the LCPS to 9.2.2.5.3 :
> 
>  
> 
> Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Cyrillic: Apply the alternative when the first element of the preferred name begins with
> either a given name or a surname?
> 
>  
> 
> But I understand what you are saying? Slavic scholarly community does not favor this practice but this is what we have
> in the NAF for many decades now, so?
> 
>  
> 
> Larisa  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Herrold, Charles
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 12:30 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
>        Concerning only Larisa?s statement near the end of her posting, RDA certainly allows the continuation of AACR2
> practice on such names as Tchaikovsky, if I read the rules correctly, and the LCPS to 9.2.2.5.3 (Name found in a
> non-preferred script) confirms that:
> 
>  
> 
> All Other Languages Written in Non-Latin Scripts: Apply the alternative to use a well-established form in English as
> the preferred name if the cataloger?s judgment and experience [emphasis added] suggests that the person is likely to
> be found in general English-language reference sources. Consider providing variant access points for forms not
> selected as the preferred name.
> 
>  
> 
>     I therefore surmise that names such Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Tchaikovsky would continue to be given in English.
> 
>  
> 
> Chuck Herrold
> 
> Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hall, Jack
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 12:33 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks, Larisa, for bringing up this aspect of the discussion. I would like to see responses from libraries working
> already with rda, including DLC. Based on some cursory looking at OCLC records, it does look like Chekhov should be:
> Chekhov, A. P. (probably with |q (Anton Pavlovich)?) I don?t know if the number of ?legacy records? is given as a valid
> reason to keep older forms that do not match current rules. I personally feel the headings should be changed to go
> along with current rules (now, rda), and worry about changing the legacy records in some way. Here, for example, we
> are considering contracting with vendors to change our authority and bib records as headings get changed.
> 
>  
> 
> If we don?t change to reflect the new rules (thus instituting a new ?compatible? type of heading), years from now the
> headings will simply look wrong.
> 
>  
> 
> Jack Hall
> 
> Manager of Cataloging Services
> 
> Linguistics Librarian
> 
> University of Houston Libraries
> 
> Houston, TX 77204-2000
> 
> phone: 713 743 9687
> 
> fax: 713 743 9748
> 
> email: [log in to unmask]
> 
>  
> 
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larisa Walsh
> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 11:15 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name
> 
>  
> 
> Jack and Robert,
> 
>  
> 
> Thank you for bringing this issue up. Discussion on changing/not changing pre-AACR2 NARs with thousands of legacy
> records has been going on among some Slavic catalogers recently, and I would like to extend it to this list.
> 
>  
> 
> I fully agree and support changing pre-AACR2 headings to RDA forms of names when re-coding to RDA.  However my
> colleagues and I found it very difficult to follow instructions on re-coding older records to RDA for certain names.
> 
>  
> 
> Please look up the NAR n  79130807  for  Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, ?d1860-1904
> 
>  
> 
> The NAR was established in 1979 under pre-AACR2 and included fuller form of name with patronymic ?Pavlovich? that in
> fact almost never appear in publications under this name. According to RDA this heading should have been established
> as ?Chekhov, Anton, ?d1860-1904?, or ?Chekhov, A. P., ?d1860-1904?.
> 
>  
> 
> I re-coded the record to RDA without changing the heading ? mostly because of the thousands of legacy records that
> would be affected. Plus imagine amount of time reporting BFMs?
> 
>  
> 
> There are many headings in the NAF similar to Chekhov one that have been established under older rules, I just
> mention couple here:
> 
>  
> 
> Pasternak, Boris Leonidovich, ?d1890-1960; under (strict) RDA should be established as: Pasternak, Boris, ?d1890-1960
> 
>  
> 
> Pushkin, Aleksandr Sergeevich, ?d1799-1837 (under RDA - Pushkin, Aleksandr, ?d1799-1837).
> 
>  
> 
> I don?t even mention here NARs for Fyodor Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoi, Peter Tchaikovsky, and other Russian writers? and
> composers? names that were established mostly according to Western reference sources or Western publications. Under
> RDA headings for these people should be changed to Russian forms (Dostoevskii, Fedor, and Tolstoi, Lev) , shouldn?t
> they?
> 
>  
> 
> I have been grandfathering older forms of headings like these when re-coding records to RDA (and I see some other
> institutions did the same) on the premise that these headings are RDA-compatible, and changing them now will bring
> much disorder to bibliographic universe.
> 
>  
> 
> I would be interested to hear what other PCC contributing libraries think about situation like this. As more and
> more older headings will be on the list for being RDAified, I am sure more people will run into the same dilemma ?
> grandfather or not?
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>