Philip

We haven't created or added to an undifferentiated NAR for quite a long
time. Recent changes to RDA have ensured that a qualifier is always
available, including an "Other designation" if nothing else is available
(9.19.1.7). "Other designation" can include a term such as "Author of
[title]" if nothing else can be devised. 

Using "Other designation" was the recommendation of the Task Group on
the Creation and Function of Name Authorities in a Non-MARC Environment,
to breaking up existing undifferentiated NARs and create unique
authorized access points. The only drawback we identified in the report
was that it would make the sorting order of name authorities less
predictable, but we noted that this was already compromised by the range
of qualifers allowed under both AACR2 and RDA.  

Regards
Richard

_________________________
Richard Moore 
Authority Control Team Manager 
The British Library
                                                                        
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                                
E-mail: [log in to unmask]                            
 
  

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Philip Schreur
Sent: 30 August 2013 17:04
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Non-MARC Authorities Part 1

Everyone,

Over the summer, PoCo has been coming to grips with a number of the
recommendations in the Non-MARC Authorities report.  By now, you have
seen my earlier message about Part 2.  Earlier this summer, PCC set up a
survey for you to respond to concerning the options presented in Part 1
for breaking up current undifferentiated name clusters.  We received
very few responses.

This has prompted me to approach this question in a different way. I'd
like, for now, to separate the question of the breaking up of existing
undifferentiated name clusters and the need for additional options for 
adding qualifier(s) to a name to make it unique going forward.    Have 
any of you been forced to add to an undifferentiated name cluster lately
(or create a new one)?  All of the additional implementable options
presented in the report had their drawbacks and the ideal could only be
realized in the future. Perhaps it would be better, if there is no
pressing need, to wait until the preferred option in the report becomes
feasible (Use the unique LCCN identifier alone to differentiate the
persons represented by authorities. 100 fields would no longer have to
be unique, and the LC/NACO Heading Comparison rules would no longer be
needed).

Over the next few weeks, could anyone who has had to create or add to an
undifferentiated name record lately send me an email.  I'll be happy to
compile the results.  Your help would be much appreciated.

Philip

--
Philip E. Schreur
Chair, Program for Cooperative Cataloging Head, Metadata Department
Stanford University
650-723-2454
650-725-1120 (fax)

**************************************************************************
Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/
 
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html
 
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook
 
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
 
*************************************************************************
 
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the mailto:[log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
 
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
 
*************************************************************************
 Think before you print