The main point of confusion about this practice is the same as arose
under AACR2 and its associated LCRIs, where in some places the "fullness"
indicated by the phrase "fuller form of name" referred to the *number of
elements* of the name (LCRI 22.3A = "e.g. B.E.F. Pagen is fuller than
Bernard Edward Pagen") and in other places it meant "fullness" of each
element (e.g Bernard Edward Pagen would be "fuller" than B.E. Pagen).
The simplest way to solve the problem would be to speak of "full forms of
entire names" and "full forms of elements of names" separately. Thus the
policy (cited below) would be more clear if it read: "Provide fuller
forms of forenames or surnames as qualifiers if parts of forenames
or surnames used in the preferred name are represented by initials or
On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Cuneo, Mary Jane wrote:
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Reser, Dave
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:23 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Revised LC-PCC Policy for Fuller form of name (18.104.22.168, option)
> The policy related to the optional use of the RDA element "Fuller form
> of name" in authorized access points for persons (RDA 22.214.171.124, option)
> has been the subject of debate ...
> LC and PCC have agreed to a new shared policy: ... "provide a fuller
> form of name if a part of the forename or surname used in the preferred
> name is represented by an initial or an abbreviation, if the cataloger
> considers it important for identification. Add unused forenames or
> surnames only if needed to distinguish one access point from another"
> (see RDA 126.96.36.199).
John G. Marr
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
[log in to unmask]
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.