And I would choose 381 with $2, because that is the actual RDA element that is being used as a qualifier. Adam Schiff University of Washington Libraries [log in to unmask] On Mon, 20 Oct 2014, Robert Maxwell wrote: > Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 14:21:41 +0000 > From: Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]> > Reply-To: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Other Distinguishing Characteristics and the 373 field > > I favor coding corporate bodies in 373 (“associated group”) because that’s where the machine (and humans) will expect to find corporate bodies recorded—373 is the standardized place to find a related corporate body; 381 is a grab bag where you can expect to find just about anything, which is not helpful if there actually is a standardized field for a particular entity (like corporate body). > > Bob > > Robert L. Maxwell > Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger > 6728 Harold B. Lee Library > Brigham Young University > Provo, UT 84602 > (801)422-5568 > > "We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842. > > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark K. Ehlert > Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 3:15 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Other Distinguishing Characteristics and the 373 field > > Skimming the NACO PowerPoint files here: > <http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/index.html> > I came across the following instruction: if the material for the "Other Distinguishing Characteristic of the Work" (RDA 6.6) and "...Expression" (RDA 6.12) is a corporate body, record that body in the 373 field, not the 381. (See "Describing Works and Expressions," slides #68, 70, and 90.) I don't recall encountering this directive before. To illustrate using an example from the MARC site: > > 130 #0 $a Research paper (South African Law Commission) > 381 ## $a South African Law Commission $2 naf > - vs. - > 130 #0 $a Research paper (South African Law Commission) > 373 ## $a South African Law Commission $2 naf > > What's the reasoning behind this? The semantics of both RDA elements line up with the 381 (<http://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ad381.html>); the field also employs a $2 like the 373 (<http://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ad373.html>). Is the source vocabulary for the $2 the issue? The 381 $2 points to the subject code list (which includes the NAF) and the 373 $2 to the name and title code list (which also includes the NAF). The DCM Z1 and LC MARC Supplement are silent on the matter as far as I can tell; the same for the "MARC 21 Encoding to Accommodate..." cheat sheet (<http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/naco/index.html>) updated earlier this year. > > Thanks, > Mark > > -- > Mark K. Ehlert Minitex > Coordinator University of Minnesota > Digitization, Cataloging & 15 Andersen Library > Metadata Education (DCME) 222 21st Avenue South > Phone: 612-624-0805 Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439 > <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/> > > "Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by > the swift course of time." -- Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen > of Verona," Act I, scene iii > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax [log in to unmask] http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~