Print

Print


I agree that adding field of study as a qualifier would be very 
helpful in many instances. I would hate to lose the year distinction, 
however. In catalogs (such as ours) with a narrower focus, we would 
need to further distinguish the multiple (lawyer) or (law professor) entries.
Kathy

At 09:39 AM 11/4/2006, you wrote:
>Mary Charles, I agree 100% that it would be good to move away from
>undifferentiated name records.
>
>Furthermore, if the cataloging rules would allow an author's field of study
>in the $c, this would serve as a more useful identifier, for both
>catalogers and users, than the additions that are currently authorized.
>Imagine index screens that look like this:
>
>Turner, David, economist.
>Turner, David, electrical engineer.
>Turner, David, political scientist.
>
>Rather than this:
>
>Turner, David, 1945-
>Turner, David, 1947-
>Turner, David, Ph.D.
>
>As automated authority control improves, retrospective changes to headings
>should become easier and easier.   Perhaps the catalogs of the future will
>have headings like:
>
>Turner, David  (architect)
>Turner, David, 1945-  (electrical engineer)
>Turner, David, 1947-  (political scientist)
>
>Amy
>
>Amy H. Turner
>Monographic Cataloger & Authority Control Coordinator
>Duke University Libraries
>Durham, NC   27708-0190
>[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>              "Lasater, Mary C"
>              <mary.c.lasater@V
>              ANDERBILT.EDU>                                             To
>              Sent by: Program          [log in to unmask]
>              for Cooperative                                            cc
>              Cataloging
>              <[log in to unmask]>                                     Subject
>                                        Re: [PCCLIST] undifferentiated name
>                                        records
>              11/04/2006 11:33
>              AM
>
>
>              Please respond to
>                 Program for
>                 Cooperative
>                 Cataloging
>              <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Paul,
>
>You have touched on a topic/problem that I hope we can 'do better'
>under RDA. I would like to see us move toward using those phrases
>that we construct as $c's with the author's name and setting these
>authority records up that way. THEN when we find out more about the
>author, we can change the 'distinct' AR instead of the 'non-unique
>AR if necessary. Several years ago I mentioned in a talk at ALA
>that I spend too much time looking for how these have changed and
>would prefer not to even have the non-unique AR. With a linked
>authority system those changes can be really bad with people
>writing books 100s of years before they were born. If instead of
>constructing non-unique's we created individual AR's with the
>phrases (that we already construct for the non-unique authority
>records) and then changed that AR when we have more info, linked
>authority system changes would automatically change the 'correct'
>authority record, only. Much/all of the time spent looking for the
>changed heading that is no longer on the non-unique (Is this the
>Tom Smith born in 1952, or 53, or is it Tom T. Smith or Tom Smith,
>Ph.D.) would be eliminated.
>
>Music catalogers already get to add these phrases and we see this
>type of 'qualification' on various web tools. What are the
>disadvantages? Do they outweigh the benefits?
>
>Mary Charles Lasater
>
>--On Friday, November 03, 2006 2:21 PM -0800 "Paul J. Weiss"
><[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I note that the practice of bracketing data in one 670 per person
> > in an undifferentiated name record is not actually given as
> > policy anywhere. The MARC authority format give it as one
> > possibility ("subfield $a may contain a descriptive term for an
> > author enclosed within brackets "). DCM  Z1 touches on it in the
> > introduction and at 670. The NACO Participants Manual describes
> > the practice, but our NACO reviewer at LC continues to remind me
> > that the PM does not set policy.
> >
> > Do any of you _not_ follow that practice? If not, what was your
> > thinking behind your decision? Have any of you considered some
> > other practice?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Paul
> > UCSD NACO Coordinator
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________
> > Paul J. Weiss
> > Catalog Librarian and NACO Coordinator
> > Metadata Services Department
> > UCSD Libraries
> > 858-534-3537
> > [log in to unmask] _______________________________________
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------
>Mary Charles Lasater
>Vanderbilt University
>Email: [log in to unmask]


***************************
Kathy Winzer
Catalog Librarian
Robert Crown Law Library
Stanford University
Stanford, CA  94305-8612

e-mail:  [log in to unmask]
phone: 650-723-0343     fax: 650-723-8657