Kathy et al.,

   For ease of reference, I'm citing the LCRI, before I discuss the application :


from LCRI 26.2:


2)  Trace a reference from each variant that affects the primary elements of the name.  For the normal, inverted heading this means variations in all elements to the left of the comma and in the first element to the right of the comma.  Do not trace a reference that would normalize to the same form as the heading or a see reference on the same record, or to the same form as a heading on another record.


3)  Refer from other variants (i.e., those that do not affect the primary entry elements) when it is judged the access to the catalog would be improved, e.g., when the heading is a common-sounding name.


Here's my (purely personal) approach to #3:  I usually do a personal name browse search of the authority file on OCLC. If the name and the x-ref would be separated by about a screen or more from each other, I add the x-ref, even if the variant doesn't affect the primary elements of the name.


In the case of the Benjamin headings, the original heading and the desired x-ref would be about 1/3- 1/2 of a screen apart; also, the variant form appears in the  first 670 of the original NAR. So I personally wouldn't add an x-ref. But one screen's separation is purely an arbitrary measure. My general advice would be to follow your best judgment in this case, and to add the x-ref if you think it's likely to avoid the creation of a duplicate NAR.




George Prager

Head of Cataloging

New York University Law School Library

voice: 212-998-6340

fax: 212-998-6587

email: [log in to unmask]






From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kathy Winzer
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 3:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] duplicate records caused, in part by our rules



We avoid adding cross references when the element in question is not the first one to the right of the comma. When an author uses his middle initial, where he previously did not, we do not provide a reference. I have in hand two name authority records for the same person that I think resulted from this practice.

When cataloging In pursuit of justice by Richard B. Zabel and James J. Benjamin, Jr., the cataloger did not notice that n86002004 Benjamin, James, 1965- included a 670 for the CIP t.p. (James J. Benjamin, Jr.) and created n 2008056697 for that form of name. Since the title page of the original title dropped the middle initial, the cataloger creating the first record dropped it from the heading and did not provide a cross reference to the fuller form (since the difference was not the first element to the right of the comma).

When I add information to the older record from the newer one, is it ok if I now add that fuller form? So a 400 for Benjamin, James J., 1965- ?  But not for the duplicate, Benjaman, James J., Jr.? I would like to avoid a repeat of the duplication next time Mr. Benjamin changes his mind about how his name should appear, but I am not always sure of how many cross references would be helpful.

Thanks for any advice,


Kathleen M. Winzer
Catalog Librarian
Robert Crown Law Library
Stanford Law School
Stanford, CA 94305-8612

650-723-0343 (voice)
650-723-8657 (fax)