Print

Print


That's correct. The 046 dates correspond to the entity named in the 1XX,
not a more extended entity ("the organization") which one might consider to
be represented by a succession of authorized access points.

The relevant rule might be RDA 11.0, "A body is considered to be a
corporate body only if it is identified by a particular name ..."; i.e.,
the thing that is known by a succession of names is not a "corporate body"
as defined by RDA. When RDA 11.2.2.6 refers to "earlier and later names of
the body," it references RDA 32, Related Corporate Bodies, where we find
"Related corporate bodies include corporate bodies that precede or succeed
the corporate body being identified as the result of a change of name."
(32.1.1.1); i.e., the earlier and later names belong to different bodies
with earlier/later name relationships to the body in focus. The names do
not all belong to one corporate body undergoing name changes per RDA,
though RDA's wording at points might be read that way.

Stephen


On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Ted P Gemberling <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  Iím assuming that probably if an organization changes its name, $t would
> be used for the end of the first name, but I wanted to be sure. RDA seems
> to imply that $t is for the end of the organization.
>
>
>
> Ted P. Gemberling
>
> Historical Collections Cataloger
>
> UAB Lister Hill Library, rm. 234B
>
> 1720 Second Ave. South
>
> Birmingham, Ala. 35294-0013
>
> Phone: (205)934-2461
>
> Fax: (205)934-3545
>
>
>



-- 
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