Print

Print


Maybe I'm overreading it, but RDA does specify "Profession or Occupation"
as a type of term appropriate for distinguishing one person from another.
To me, this implies an expectation, or at least an option, that the term
will be categorized as indicating a profession or occupation.  MARC
authorities accommodate that by providing the 374 field where the RDA
category is expressed in the tag value.  I can imagine other ways a term
could be categorized, including a term added only to an authorized access
point; and but MARC is what we use.  I agree that RDA does not require this
kind of categorization; but it does encourage us to make it possble. If RDA
did not intend to distinguish different qualifying information by
categories, then I'm not sure why the 3XX "RDA fields" were added to the
authority format.

What is missing from RDA itself is any instruction to use controlled
vocabularies to express the attributes of persons.  That comes from PCC.
I'm all for using controlled vocabularies; but I can also see a case for
using the 374 to categorize an uncontrolled term which appears in a 100 $c.

Stephen

On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Adam L. Schiff <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2015, Kevin M Randall wrote:
>
>  And if we want to use a controlled vocabulary, the only agreed-upon one
>> for the PCC is LCSH.
>>
>
> On this, I must respectfully but forcefully disagree, Kevin.  The DCM Z1
> does not say we should use LCSH.  For example for field 374 it says:
> "Prefer controlled vocabulary, such as LCSH or Me
> SH, recording the source in subfield $2."  For 372 it says: "When
> recording a term indicating the field, prefer controlled vocabulary, such
> as LCSH or MeSH, recording the source in subfield $2."  For 368 it says:
> "Prefer controlled vocabulary for terms, recording the source in subfield
> $2."
>
> LCSH happens to be the easiest controlled vocabulary for most of us to
> use, because it is easy to search in the utilities, and it is quite
> familiar since many of us use it for assigning subject headings.  But it is
> not a mandated vocabulary to use and certainly not the only agreed-upon one
> for PCC.
>
> Adam
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 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
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>



-- 
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242