Print

Print


Mary Charles
 
I agree: I hope we can rely on judgement.
 
Regards
Richard

________________________________

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lasater, Mary Charles
Sent: 08 October 2012 12:59
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name



Richard,

 

I think your example of ‘Smith, P.’ is a good example of using ‘cataloger’s judgment’. Judgment is also important in deciding to leave off the $q (…) when the heading is much less likely to need the information for conflicts.  I have been leaving off many $q’s because they often cause our Discovery system facets to have multiple entries for the same person.  I am following the LCPS or coding the NAR as AACR2, but is there a PCC decision yet? I have been hunting for the PCC decisions since I am preparing for some in-house training.  I saw the statement about LC and PCC working hard to have the same decisions. Do I have to wait for the next update to the Desktop to find out where PCC stands?

 

I hope we can rely on judgment and not have to follow policy statements ‘to the letter’ when using the $q in the 1xx field.

 

Mary Charles

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 1:59 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

 

Amy

 

As LC don't appear to be insisting that we follow the LCPS, the BL has chosen to follow the main instruction at 9.19.1.4 where unused forenames are concerned (i.e. only add in case of conflict), and the optional addition where expansions of initials are concerned (i.e. always add if known). 

 

My view is that wantonly to omit expansions from an access point like "Smith, P." because it happens to be unique at the time of creation does not identify the person well, and also stores up future conflict.

 

Regards

Richard

 

_________________________

Richard Moore 

Authority Control Team Manager 

The British Library

                                                                                                

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                                       

E-mail: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>                                                 

 

 

________________________________

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: 05 October 2012 10:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

Bob, I am glad that you and Kevin agree that these headings are fine as is, although a LCPS says not to follow the option of adding $qs when they are not needed to distinguish.   I went back to the report on the Task Group on AACR2 & RDA Acceptable Heading Categories and found this paragraph:

 

           The PCC policy on changes to authority 1XX fields applies both before and after the migration. At present, this policy holds that no change is to be made to an authority 1XX field that is not in error in a matter of fact and is not in conflict with other authority data. A non-conflicting authority 1XX field is not to be changed simply because additional information becomes available—the new information may be preserved in suitable non-1XX authority variable fields. This policy covers AACR2 headings acceptable for use under RDA. This PCC policy is subject to modification by PCC as circumstances warrant.

 

Perhaps it would be good to post this policy somewhere prominent as we move into RDA, and to elaborate on “not an error in matter of fact.”  Many of the 95% of AACR2 headings that will be automatically recoded as RDA might be different if they had been constructed under RDA plus LCPS.   However, this does not make them factually incorrect.

 

Amy

 

 

Amy Turner

 

Monographic Cataloger and Authority Control Coordinator

Duke University Libraries

 

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 1:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

 

Amy,

 

I’m not sure I understand. The forms you show comply with RDA and so do not need to be changed. RDA, like AACR2, allows fuller forms and dates to be added to authorized access points even if not needed to distinguish, so the access points for Cummings, Eliot, and Montgomery are fine as far as the form goes.

 

Bob

 

Robert L. Maxwell

Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian

Genre/Form Authorities Librarian

6728 Harold B. Lee Library

Brigham Young University

Provo, UT 84602

(801)422-5568 

 

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 11:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

 

Though Duke has not fully implemented RDA, I have had the RDA NACO training, and would like to discuss RDA 9.19.1.4 Fuller Form of name:

 

“If neither the date of birth nor the date of death of the person is available to distinguish one access point from another (see 9.19.1.3  <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp9&target=rda9-5621#rda9-5621> ), add a fuller form of the person’s name (see 9.5 <http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp9&target=rda9-4864#rda9-4864> ).”

 

Strict adherence to this rule would change LOTS of AACR2 headings like:

 

Cummings, E. E. ǂq (Edward Estlin), ǂd 1894-1962

Eliot, T. S. ǂq (Thomas Stearns), ǂd 1888-1965

Montgomery, L. M. ǂq (Lucy Maud), ǂd 1874-1942

 

If we were starting from scratch, I think the RDA rule is sensible, leaving out names that the author made a conscious decision not to use (and perhaps hated/hates with a passion).  However, as we deal with out “legacy data,” I hope that we will choose to consider these AACR2 headings to be RDA compatible, especially as we are looking forward to a linked data world where the “heading” is less important than the “identity.”

 

Amy

 

 

Amy Turner

 

Monographic Cataloger and Authority Control Coordinator

Duke University Libraries

 

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hall, Jack
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 12:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

 

Thanks, Larisa, for bringing up this aspect of the discussion. I would like to see responses from libraries working already with rda, including DLC. Based on some cursory looking at OCLC records, it does look like Chekhov should be: Chekhov, A. P. (probably with |q (Anton Pavlovich)?) I don’t know if the number of “legacy records” is given as a valid reason to keep older forms that do not match current rules. I personally feel the headings should be changed to go along with current rules (now, rda), and worry about changing the legacy records in some way. Here, for example, we are considering contracting with vendors to change our authority and bib records as headings get changed. 

 

If we don’t change to reflect the new rules (thus instituting a new “compatible” type of heading), years from now the headings will simply look wrong. 

 

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]

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larisa Walsh
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 11:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA name authority record that established an apparently unused form of name

 

Jack and Robert,

 

Thank you for bringing this issue up. Discussion on changing/not changing pre-AACR2 NARs with thousands of legacy records has been going on among some Slavic catalogers recently, and I would like to extend it to this list.

 

I fully agree and support changing pre-AACR2 headings to RDA forms of names when re-coding to RDA.  However my colleagues and I found it very difficult to follow instructions on re-coding older records to RDA for certain names.

 

Please look up the NAR n  79130807  for  Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, ǂd 1860-1904 

 

The NAR was established in 1979 under pre-AACR2 and included fuller form of name with patronymic “Pavlovich” that in fact almost never appear in publications under this name. According to RDA this heading should have been established as “Chekhov, Anton, ǂd 1860-1904”, or “Chekhov, A. P., ǂd 1860-1904”.

 

I re-coded the record to RDA without changing the heading – mostly because of the thousands of legacy records that would be affected. Plus imagine amount of time reporting BFMs…

 

There are many headings in the NAF similar to Chekhov one that have been established under older rules, I just mention couple here: 

 

Pasternak, Boris Leonidovich, ǂd 1890-1960; under (strict) RDA should be established as: Pasternak, Boris, ǂd 1890-1960

 

Pushkin, Aleksandr Sergeevich, ǂd 1799-1837 (under RDA - Pushkin, Aleksandr, ǂd 1799-1837).

 

I don’t even mention here NARs for Fyodor Dostoevsky, Leo Tolstoi, Peter Tchaikovsky, and other Russian writers’ and composers’ names that were established mostly according to Western reference sources or Western publications. Under RDA headings for these people should be changed to Russian forms (Dostoevskii, Fedor, and Tolstoi, Lev) , shouldn’t they?

 

I have been grandfathering older forms of headings like these when re-coding records to RDA (and I see some other institutions did the same) on the premise that these headings are RDA-compatible, and changing them now will bring much disorder to bibliographic universe. 

 

I would be interested to hear what other PCC contributing libraries think about situation like this. As more and more older headings will be on the list for being RDAified, I am sure more people will run into the same dilemma – grandfather or not?

 

Thank you,

 

Larisa Walsh

Regenstein Library

University of Chicago

1100 East 57th Street, Rm. 170

Chicago, Illinois 60637

e-mail: [log in to unmask]

Fax: (773) 702-6623