Actually there are two things needed to deal with differentiating names. 
One is a standard default bit of qualifying information. For example, if 
the LCCN were appended to the heading string of all NAF records when 
heading comparisons are done, any name heading could be differentiated. 
The "Smith, John" who writes on quantum physics could be differentiated 
from the "Smith, John" who writes pet care manuals, even though nothing 
more was known about either of them.

Equally important, we need a better way of choosing among potential NAF 
matches for a bib heading we're seeking to authorize. The RDA 
accommodations to MARC enable the specific encoding of much more 
information about entities than has been the case in standard NAF 
records, where 670s have become a jumble of different kinds of data with 
no real term control. If authority records carried a richer set of 
characterizing data elements, and if systems could combine those 
elements for search and list displays to present richer data for making 
choices, authorizing bib headings for common names could be a lot more 


Ted P Gemberling wrote:
> I can just see it now: 
> Warfield, Gerald, |c composer who later wrote on feng shui and investing
> Or I suppose that since feng shui is a pretty unusual subject, we could make a rule that anyone who has ever worked with feng shui should have that as their sole qualifier. 
> Ted Gemberling
> UAB Lister Hill Library
> (205)934-2461
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hall, Jack
> Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2010 12:01 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] a NACO question
> I would rather add the name to an undifferentiated record than come up
> with a |c. For one thing, the field of endeavor can change. Have a look
> at the NAR for Warfield, Gerald, who has composed music, and written on
> (at least) music theory, feng shui, and investing.
> Jack 
> 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]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2010 2:36 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] a NACO question
> I think we have all (LC catalogers included) been extending/bending what
> the 22.19 and its LCRI says about what can be used in $c to break 
> conflicts.  You will find numerous terms added to post-19th century
> names 
> that are clearly a violation of 22.19 and its LCRI (e.g., actor,
> director, 
> lawyer, physician).  Technically, I would say that "dancer", "ballet 
> dancer" and the like are going beyond what we are allowed by the AACR2 
> rule and LCRI to do.  However, RDA will allow the addition of an 
> occupation/profession or field of activity to break conflicts, so I
> don't 
> really feel that adding these kinds of terms now is so bad.  However, if
> you want to follow the letter of the law so to speak, you can't add
> these 
> kinds of terms to AACR2 names for post-19th century persons.
> Adam
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 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]
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> On Mon, 24 May 2010, Horne, Carl Stanley wrote:
>> Dear NACO colleagues,
>> I am wondering about the exact limits on using a ", $c" term to avoid
> an undifferentiated name AR.
>> The basic guideline I understand: To be used, such a term should
> appear in conjunction ?with the name in a prominent source (t.p., cover)
> in items by the person or with the name in headings in reference
> sources.? (LC RI to 22.17-22.20, 1.c.)
>> I think the guideline becomes more flexible with musicians, so we have
> a lot of instances like ", $c soprano" and ", $c trombonist".
>> My question is whether the category of musical arts extends to
> dancers.  In OCLC I just found quite a few dozen instances of ", $c
> dancer", and an occasional ", $c ballet dancer" or ", $c modern dancer".
> I favor this extension of the category to include other musical arts,
> but I'm wondering whether there is any clear guidance allowing or
> disallowing it.
>> Anyone have clear information ........... or a strong opinion?
>> Carl Horne
>> Slavic and Central Eurasian Cataloger
>> & NACO/SACO Liaison
>> Indiana University Library
>> Bloomington, IN  47405

Stephen Hearn
Metadata Strategist, Technical Services Dept.
University Libraries, University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN  55455
Ph: 612-625-2328 / Fax: 612-625-3428