One thing we're still getting to grips with is the number of different
ways in which the same piece of information can be recorded. For
example, the name of a superior body might be recorded as part of a
subordinate body's preferred name (, as an associated
institution (11.5) and/or by a relationship to a hierarchical superior
(K.4.3). At the moment we are not duplicating in 373 and 510 the name of
a superior body that is already recorded in a preferred or variant name
under or, partly on the grounds that a "machine"
could be programmed to look for it anywhere in the record, but mainly on
the grounds of efficiency.


Where K.4.3 is concerned, I agree in principle with the minority view of
the Task Group to Formulate or Recommend PCC/NACO RDA Policy on
Authority Issues (N-23): "In order to ensure that the machine can
reliably and consistently collocate subordinate bodies, the presence of
the 510 field is necessary, even if to a human being it appears to be
redundant". However, given the paucity of these relationships currently
on the authority file, I found it hard to justify the extra time spent,
so we don't currently do it. I appreciate this is a self-defeating


Affiliation, and Associated Institution, recorded in 373 are a little
vague, and it might be useful to have more specific sub-elements and
extra MARC subfields (for as long as we are using MARC). These might be
for institutions where a person works, institutions where a person
studies, etc., but then this too duplicates possible relationships in


I'd be interested to know how others are approaching this.







Richard Moore 

Authority Control Team Manager 

The British Library


Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                       

E-mail: [log in to unmask]                             



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: 30 July 2013 22:13
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Place of death vs Affiliation


Agreed. Similarly, lots of people are born or die in hospitals, but
that's not what we want to name in 370 (or 373).




On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Gary L Strawn <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

All this true stuff said, let us not forget that most organizations
should be treated as such, and not as places.  (In other words, just
because someone works at University X doesn't mean that University X
should be in the 370 field-though the place in which University X is
located might be.)  To put it all into perspective, here's a fun case
which, in all fairness, is probably just simply rather than
misconceived.  Alhough (of course!) this 370 isn't supported by
information elsewhere in the record, it's still a good guess that the
person works here, and wasn't born here:




Gary L. Strawn, Authorities Librarian, etc.           Twitter:

Northwestern University Library, 1970 Campus Drive, Evanston IL

e-mail: [log in to unmask]   voice: 847/491-2788
<tel:847%2F491-2788>    fax: 847/491-8306 <tel:847%2F491-8306> 

Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit.       BatchCat version:


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:
[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 1:15 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Place of death vs Affiliation




I think it's OK to use Karlag (Concentration Camp) in 370. I have an
email from Dave Reser (who I hope won't mind my taking his name in vain)
from  February 2012, during the course of a discussion of 370 and
non-jurisdictional place names, in which he says:



Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist

Technical Services, University Libraries

University of Minnesota

160 Wilson Library

309 19th Avenue South

Minneapolis, MN 55455

Ph: 612-625-2328

Fx: 612-625-3428

Experience the British Library online at
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts :
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book.
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the mailto:[log in to unmask] : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
 Think before you print