Print

Print


Vicki,

 

This has always been one of the more confusing (and less-documented) areas of NACO work at the program level, and has been applied and interpreted at the local institutional level, taking into account local cataloging policies.

 

Some NACO catalogers take unauthorized access points in OCLC or SkyRiver into account in their NACO work, and others do not. Early in my NACO training days I made a big deal about this and recommended that catalogers always take those unauthorized access points in OCLC, SkyRiver (or RLIN, too, back then) into account, but as time has passed, I am less forceful-- and the overall importance of considering those unauthorized access points has diminished and is now left up to local institutional policy.

 

You referred to Personal Name FAQ #17 (repeated below), but Personal Name FAQ #16 also gives more guidance. (The FAQs talk about an AACR2 environment, but the same discussion applies to the RDA environment as well):

 

http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/naco/personnamefaq.html

 

16.  May the guidelines in LCRI 22.17-20 be applied (to new names being established) in order to avoid conflict with unestablished headings on bibliographic records in the file in which I'm cataloging?

 

The wording in this LCRI indicates that the guidelines may only be applied to conflicts with established names ("Add to the heading being established..." and "Change the established heading...") These alternatives mostly work in LC's catalog, where in principle, all names are established. In other databases (e.g., OCLC and SkyRiver), many names are not established. Consequently, the relationship of the unestablished names to this LCRI is ambiguous. Would you clarify?

 

Yes, catalogers may apply the guidelines in LCRI22.17-22.20 for resolving conflicts with both established and unestablished headings.

In a perfect cataloging world all access points would have authority records to support them. In recent years diminishing resources and increasing receipts in all libraries (including LC) have led to the increase of bibliographic records without authorized headings.

 

LC practice is to resolve conflicts with other headings in the NAF as well as unestablished headings in the LC catalog as encountered. The guidelines provided in LCRI22.17-22.20 are applied in this situation and BFM is performed as necessary.

 

PCC catalogers using AACR2 or RDA are encouraged to follow their local institutional and utilities' cataloging policies with regard to this question.

 

Note: there is no NACO requirement to create NARs for all headings used as access points on bibliographic records unless the bibliographic records are to be coded "pcc". Under RDA this practice will continue.

 

17.  What should a NACO cataloger do if there are unestablished headings for other persons in the file in which the cataloging is conducted (e.g., OCLC or SkyRiver) which conflict with the heading being established and there is no additional information to differentiate the names?

 

There are three options open to NACO participants in this situation:

 

1.       Do not create a NAR for the heading (BIBCO participants--do not code the bibliographic record "pcc")

 

2.       If possible(and local policies/resources allow) create unique NARs for each of the other headings in the files

 

3.       Create an undifferentiated NAR (AACR2 22.20) to include all the unestablished names (this means some research was performed and option 2 could not be applied)

 

Paul

 

Paul Frank

Cooperative Programs Section

Cooperative and Instructional Programs Division

Library of Congress

101 Independence Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20540-4230

202-707-1570

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lasater, Mary Charles
Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:14 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Conflict situation?

 

Vicki,

 

Thank you for raising this question. The FAQ slipped by lots of us when it was posted. I noticed it last year when I prepared to do a 5 day training for AACR2.  Often the ‘answer’ has been to not create an authority record.

 

I hope someone will answer from Library of Congress or PCC.

 

Mary Charles Lasater

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Brueck, Vicki
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 10:23 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] Conflict situation?

 

First let me say that I am starting to train a couple of catalogers to create personal name NACO authority records using RDA.  So I have been going back through all of the recent emails and looking on PCC and PSD websites to make sure that I am going to teach the latest best practices and to hopefully be prepared for all (or at least most) of the nitty gritty questions I’ll be asked.  I wish that I could wait until the RDA version of the NACO training manual was written but I need to start the training now, not later this spring or summer.  So I am pulling information from the AACR2 NACO training program (the 5 day training that we all went through) and adding it to the bridge training for RDA NACO, and throwing in best practice information that has developed since the bridge RDA NACO training was recorded.

 

All of that is to introduce my question.  In the 5 day AACR2 NACO training under searching OCLC and what constitutes a conflict (Day 2 slide 132, April 2010).  The heading of the slide is “Conflicts : Four Situations” the last bullet point is “New 100 NAR vs. Bibliographic 100 or 700 form for which no NAR exists”  The trainer manual explains this point as: “4th bullet: This is a conflict, but it does not require action from you.  Catalogers are not required to break conflicts with names on bibliographic records for which no NARs yet exist.  This is a rare situation, which generates questions.  The point to remember is that you do not have to change the existing bibliographic record access points just because they conflict with a new NAR.”

 

This seems to state that a bibliographic 100/600/700 without a NAR does conflict with a new NAR 100 that you are establishing, but you don’t have to do anything about it.

 

However, when I was reading through the Personal name FAQs on creating NARs I found question 17:

1.   What should a NACO cataloger do if there are unestablished headings for other persons in the file in which the cataloging is conducted (e.g., OCLC or SkyRiver) which conflict with the heading being established and there is no additional information to differentiate the names?

There are three options open to NACO participants in this situation:

1.      Do not create a NAR for the heading (BIBCO participants--do not code the bibliographic record "pcc")

2.      If possible(and local policies/resources allow) create unique NARs for each of the other headings in the files

3.      Create an undifferentiated NAR (AACR2 22.20) to include all the unestablished names (this means some research was performed and option 2 could not be applied)

 

 

This seems to contradict the above information and states that bibliographic headings without NARs are in conflict with a 100 that I am trying to establish and that I must resolve the conflict or create an undifferentiated authority or not establish the new NAF even if the new NAF does not conflict with any other NAF.

 

 

 

The only guidance I can find in the RDA Toolkit is:

Make the additions specified at 9.19.1.2http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png even if they are not needed to distinguish access points representing different persons with the same name.

Make the additions specified at 9.19.1.39.19.1.6http://access.rdatoolkit.org/images/rdalink.png if they are needed to distinguish access points representing different persons with the same name.

 

The LC-PCC PS has:

Differentiating Authorized Access Points for Persons

LC practice/PCC practice: Include the date of birth and date of death if available in the authorized access point for a person when creating a new name authority record. If an addition is needed to differentiate the authorized access point for one person from the authorized access point for another person, apply cataloger judgment when choosing to add one of the following (not listed in priority order) to the authorized access point being established: period of activity of the person, fuller form of name, and/or profession or occupation.

If there are no additions readily available to differentiate the access point in the new authority record, make an addition to the existing authorized access point.

 

 

 

I would like to have clarification on this point.  Is it currently true that newly established NARs cannot be in conflict with bibliographic 100/600/700 fields that are in existence at the time of the creation of the new NAF?

 

Thanks,

Vicki

 

Vicki Brueck

Senior Cataloger

Resource Management Services Branch

State Library of North Carolina

4641 Mail Service Center

Raleigh, N.C.  27699-4641

[log in to unmask]

Office: (919) 807-7451  Fax: (919) 733-1843

 

E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law "NCGS.Ch.132" and may be disclosed to third parties by an authorized state official.

 

dcr-200px-logoState-Library-200-200px