Print

Print


It is local systems which rely on the linkage of a character string to flip headings from the old form to the new. The automated authority work that vendors do using complex programming are able to make changes without references but local library systems usually cannot.

 

Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:14 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Record not OK for RDA yet?

 

Do you know whose BFM was being considered, and exactly how the reference was supposed to help?   As I understand it, LC still does BFM manually, based on reports from OCLC of changed ARs.   Many automated authority systems make changes based on established links between  bibliographic and authority records.   For example, LTI adds MANY death dates without the help of any reference.  

 

It seems very arbitrary to single out changes from AACR2 to RDA from the many other changes made to authorized headings.

 

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 Mary Mastraccio
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 11:12 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Record not OK for RDA yet?

 

This exception was made to assist with BFM because of the large number of RDA changes. Yes, adding the old 1xx as a variant applies to all pre-RDA forms.

 

Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678


From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 9:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Record not OK for RDA yet?

 

I have wondered about this requirement.   One of the examples is:

 

AACR2:
100 1 $a Walter, David, ád 1948-
RDA:
100 1 $a Walter, David, ád 1948-2012
400 1 $a Walter, David, ád 1948- $w nne

 

This seems to be saying that anytime we are adding a death date and happen to be recoding to rda, we need to make the reference.   What purpose does it serve?   Isnít this an odd exception to the general rule that variant access points are optional under RDA?

 

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 John Hostage
Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 10:20 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Record not OK for RDA yet?

 

I believe a 4XX for the old heading should always be added now.  Surely this also applies to AACR2-compatible (008/10=d) and pre-AACR2 (008/10=a or b) headings.

http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/naco/personnamefaq.html#13

 

 

------------------------------------------

John Hostage

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger //

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services //

Langdell Hall 194 //

Cambridge, MA 02138

[log in to unmask]

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)

 

----------------------------------------------------------

This particular record got flagged automatically to receive a 667 note, because the Fixed Field for Rules is coded d, indicating that it was a pre-AACR record. All records with "d" in the Rules Fixed Field were flagged in this way; they were all automatic candidates for review and possible changes in order to conform to RDA. There are many others like them still in the NAF, awaiting human review.

In the meantime, I see that a helpful NACO colleague has already upgraded the record to RDA, so the problem with this particular record is solved.