Print

Print


It seems to me that there is substantial confusion about name authority
headings included in the NAF file. The discussion thread below is just an
example of it. Part of the problem is that the RDA proponents refuse to
compromise on accepting established NAF headings according to AACR2 rules.
Instead, they forge ahead to create RDA headings in existing NAF files and
include them in their RDA bibliographical records.

We have already discussed irresponsibility of such approach and the PCC
decision to discontinue it after the RDA test was a logical solution.
However, the question of continuing of such approach in RDA bibliographical
records after the test is ended will certainly create a problem for OCLC
and libraries using OCLC records for their copy cataloging. It is certain
that in January 2011 there will be some libraries creating RDA
bibliographical records with unauthorized (RDA) authority records and
libraries continuing AACR2 cataloging following established rules for
creation of bibliographical records and authority headings. Therefore there
will be bibliographical records in OCLC for the same items coded in
different cataloging languages, but also in different rules (RDA and
AACR2).
Will the OCLC follow our suggestions and code and group these records
separately as it does with foreign cataloging records?
Will there be a separate authority files to accommodate RDA headings?

I give you an example of such extreme RDA name authority headings:

Wilde, Oscar, ǂd 1854-1900 [it sounds simple and is widely accepted]

Here comes RDA and makes it into Wilde, Oscar ǂq (Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie
Wills), ǂd 1854-1900. In addition RDA also supplies the following
374  dramatist ǂa poet
375  male
377  eng
What is that? Why is it there? And finally who needs it?

The authority record already contained 4001 Wilde, Oscar Fingall
O'Flahertie Wills, ǂd 1854-1900 as well as 670  LCCN48-33420: His Children
in prison ... 1898 ǂb (hdg.: Wilde, Oscar, 1854-1900; variant: Oscar
Fingall O'Flahertie Wills Wilde)

I assume that extreme RDA added the following as well 670  Wikipedia, 18
November 2010 ǂb (Oscar Fingal O'Flahertie Wills Wilde (16 October 1854-30
November 1900) was an Irish writer, poet)

How are all these RDA changes making this particular entry any better or
explaining any better who Oscar Wilde was?

It seems to me that catalogers or RDA proponents who grew up on Wikipedia
and Youtube needed to add Wikipedia as a resource although it did not
supply anything new or vital to already existing authority record. This
example follows previous examples of Elvis Presley and Richard Wagner
discussed earlier.

Wojciech Siemaszkiewicz
New York Public Library
Library Services Center
31-11 Thompson Ave.
Long Island City, N.Y. 11101
(917) 229-9603
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Please note, any opinions expressed above do not necessarily reflect those
of The New York Public Library.



                                                                                  
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
         Re: Policy Committee meeting outcomes (Clarification on Decision 2)      
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
         Riemer, John                                                             
                      to:                                                         
                        PCCLIST                                                   
                                                              12/17/2010 12:54 AM 
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
         Sent by:                                                                 
               Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>      
        Please respond to Program for Cooperative Cataloging                      
                                                                                  
                                                                                  
                                                                                  






Diane and others,

It appears best to follow AACR2 for the entire heading, if any part of it
is AACR2, and to code it as such.  Hybrid headings could turn out to be too
challenging to get flipped into complete conformance to a single code, once
an implementation decision is reached.

If the "building block" you are using is RDA, keep the entire new heading
in RDA.  You may consult [log in to unmask] for help.  Adding 7XX fields in
authority records is considered optional.

If you encounter a situation such as Bob Maxwell described today, where the
AACR2 heading and the RDA heading are not equivalent in scope, and a
portion of the required RDA heading would conflict with an established
AACR2 heading, use AACR2 to catalog the item during this interim period.

    John


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Boehr, Diane (NIH/NLM) [E]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes (Clarification on
Decision 2)

John,

If you are using an AACR2 authority record as a building block for a new
RDA heading, how would the resulting authority record be coded: AACR2 or
RDA?  If in your second example, the new subordinate entity was not Tobacco
Advisory Group, but the Department of Tobacco Advice, would a library doing
RDA cataloging establish a hybrid heading ($a=AACR2 and $b=RDA)?

AACR2 authority record

110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London
710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England)

New heading needed for cataloging

110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London. $b Department of Tobacco
Advice
710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England). $b Department of
Tobacco Advice

OR

110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London. $b Dept of Tobacco Advice
710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England). $b Department of
Tobacco Advice


Also, what about guidance for those of us who are continuing to catalog in
AACR2, but may encounter RDA authority records.  I assume the PCC still
wants us to use the form of name in the 1XX field in our bibliographic
record.  Are we expected to add 7XXs for the AACR2 form of the name?  And
what happens if you need to use an RDA authority record as a building block
for a new AACR2 heading?  How would that resulting authority record get
coded?


Diane Boehr
Head of Cataloging
National Library of Medicine
8600 Rockville Pike, Room 1N11
Bethesda, MD 20894
301-435-7059
[log in to unmask]



-----Original Message-----
From: Riemer, John [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 1:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes (Clarification on
Decision 2)

Bob,

The 1XX forms from existing AACR2 authority records are to be used in
bibliographic records.  This is true even when the AACR2 form represents a
"building block" in a new heading being formulated.  RDA forms may be added
to 7XX fields in the authority records, particularly when the heading form
would be different.  Examples:


AACR2 authority record

100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev.
700 14 $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman)

New heading needed for cataloging

100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev. $t Poems
700 14 $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman). $t Poems


AACR2 authority record

110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London
710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England)

New heading needed for cataloging

110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London. $b Tobacco Advisory Group
710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England). $b Tobacco
Advisory Group


The Policy Committee has also slightly revised the final portion of
Decision 2:

2. After the test period ends in Dec. 2010, PCC members may continue to use
the RDA testing guidelines from Jan. 2 until further notice, with the
exception that already-established AACR2 heading forms should be used in
bibliographic records. This decision will be reevaluated at the time an
implementation decision is made.

   John

John Riemer
Head, UCLA Library Cataloging & Metadata Center
Kinross South
11020 Kinross Avenue
Box 957230
(campus mail code 723011)
Los Angeles, CA  90095-7230
+1 310.825.2901 voice
+1 310.794.9357 fax
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 2:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes

Decision 2 needs a bit of clarification, perhaps:

"2. After the test period ends in Dec. 2010, PCC members may continue to
use the RDA testing guidelines from Jan. 2 until further notice, with the
exception that already-established AACR2 heading forms should be used in
bibliographic records. This decision will be reevaluated in April 2011."

A. I assume this means we will continue to add 7XX fields to the authority
records for the RDA form, which may differ from the AACR2 form in the 1XX
field, but we will use the 1XX form in the bib record.

B. What about brand new RDA authority records related to existing AACR2
authority forms? Presumably we are to use the RDA form in the 1XX of those
records (and in the RDA bib record), but what if that form differs from the
AACR2 form on the related authority record? E.g. (example from the "testing
guidelines"):

AACR2 authority record

100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev.
700 14 $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman)

New RDA authority record

100 1_ $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman). $t Poems

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568


-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Les Hawkins
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:49 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Policy Committee meeting outcomes

PCC Colleagues,

The PCC Policy Committee (PoCo) met November 4-5, 2010 for its annual
meeting. Decisions and action items from the meeting are available and
posted on the PCC web site: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/PCC-Actions.html


Les Hawkins
CONSER Coordinator
Library of Congress
[log in to unmask]