PCCLIST readers,
Two NARs are now extant for the conference "Conference on Stably Stratified Flows" with which Mary Charles Lasater initiated this e-mail thread. One was originally created for the ongoing series, then changed to represent just the fifth (in the process, merging two NARs and updating to RDA). One was originally created to represent just the fourth. Perhaps the one representing just the fourth should not have been created according to AACR2 NACO practice (below) but is now what is required in RDA.
Recently I used OCLC's macro for creating a NAR, and it created one for the ongoing series. In the bib record, I added data for the individual conference (number, year, place) and controlled the heading.
The document NACO Training for OCLC Libraries (April 2010), available here
http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco/pdf/training_manuals/2010_Trainees_Manual.pdf
has on p. 3-57 this information:
Conferences : Ongoing
$a subfield: place or date
• Omit number and frequency words from name of conference (e.g. second, annual, etc.)
Bibliographic record:
• Always add number ($n), date ($d), and place ($c) in bibliographic access point, if available
Name authority record:
• Do not add any qualifier in NAR
• If a conflict exists, add appropriate qualifier in 111
AACR2 & LCRI 24.7B
Is this information now obsolete? Under RDA, I understand that all NARs are required to have qualifying information. (Note: I have not yet received RDA training for NACO - please correct if necessary.) So there will be no more NARs for ongoing series, just for individual conferences. Is this correct? Surely new NARs need to be created in all cases, as Mary Charles originally said. But if this is not widely understood, the consequences can cause a minor havoc. - Ian