My understanding is that LAC and LC are not concerned about AMICUS bib records matching the form found in the LC/NACO AF.  If you're using copy in OCLC from LAC, you should control the access points against the LC/NACO AF and not worry that AMICUS isn't in synch.  At least, that's how I understand what we are expected to do.  The different authority records will theoretically at least cluster in VIAF, which is why I think LC and LAC decided that NACO didn't have to follow the LAC form.

As for establishing the RDA form, you should take into account whatever information you find about the form of name by which a person is commonly known or the form used predominantly, which may indeed be different from the form that LAC originally used.  (Actually the same is true of LC/NACO forms - if a person becomes commonly known by a different form of name since the authority was created, it may be appropriate to change the authority record to reflect that change.)


Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
(206) 543-8409
(206) 685-8782 fax

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ed M. Kazzimir
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2015 3:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Canadian personal/corporate names and NACO

Descriptive Cataloging Manual (DCM) Z1, under 1XX Headings, says "As of August 2012 LC and PCC catalogers creating RDA name authority records are not required to search Library and Archives Canada (LAC) to determine the form of the authorized access point for either personal or corporate names."  I think I remember that being mentioned during RDA/NACO training.  However, in establishing or editing an authority record for personal and corporate names under RDA in the LC/NACO authority file for Canadian authors and bodies, I worry that  incongruence will result.  Do we just not worry about that?  Any thoughts?

I found an authority record for a particular author in Canadiana Authorities.  All six bibliographic records for that person in the AMICUS Catalogue use that established name.  I wish to set up an LC/NACO record.  However, the current Canadiana access point was based on the first item cataloged, but it appeared in only that one publication.  The most frequent form appears as a cross-reference in that authority record.  We wish to upgrade an 'abbreviated' Library and Archives Canada bibliographic record in OCLC.  If the NACO record is established per RDA rules, then the 100 in the NACO record will match a cross-reference in the Canadiana database and vice versa.  And furthermore, the AMICUS bibliographic records would not match the LC/NACO authority record nor any updated records in OCLC WorldCat that ought to match the NACO record.

Ed Kazzimir