Quite so. I wasn't thinking about the problem of indistinctive or unqualified personal names.

 

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Thursday, 09 June 2016 13:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

Regarding always making a VAP for a former heading--Yes and no. If I modify a heading to add a date to distinguish that name from another I'm establishing, that former established heading can't be treated as a VAP.  More generally, preserving a minimally qualified personal name as a VAP can cause problems in less discriminating systems (such as ours) that take any text match to a VAP as justification for for changing the bib heading.  If someone changed "Smith, John" with "Smith, J. (John), 1952-" based on a review of usage, I'd be OK with a VAP for "Smith, John, 1952-", but a simple VAP for the former heading "Smith, John" would potentially cause problems for us. I'd prefer to have room for exercising judgment in such cases.

 

Stephen

 

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Deborah J. Leslie <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

If you change an authorized access point, and do not make a variant access point for the previous, erroneous access point, how are our machines going to know to change to make the automatic change? From our experience with automated authority control, a significant percent of the unmatched headings are due to exactly that failure.

 

Finding or not finding the person or entity by catalogers or users in this case isn't the point so much as making our data machine-friendly. This is an old PCC practice that is ripe for change. If we need coding or a relationship indicator to provide special explanation for these headings, then let's do it. I can see no justification for not providing a VAR for a former AAP on an authority record.

 

Deborah J. Leslie, M.A., M.L.S. | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] | 202.675-0369 | 201 East Capitol St., SE, Washington, DC 20003 | www. folger.edu | orcid.org/0000-0001-5848-5467

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Phyllis Jones
Sent: Thursday, 09 June 2016 10:17


To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

I agree with Will Evans that we need solutions for the present while keeping an eye to the catalog of the future. As to how important accurate headings are to patrons, I've always said that when we're doing our job well, our work is totally transparent. Unfortunately it's also true that many of our errors are also invisible -- something like a Rumsfeldian unknown unknown -- and when a patron fails to find something our library does in fact hold, he/she is likely to conclude simply that the item isn't available, not that the cataloging is faulty. Yes, a change in death date probably wouldn't result in failure to find but an underlying philosophy that highly valorizes accuracy will in the long run probably lead to superior retrieval. If new discoveries in scholarship are reflected in our headings (or at least in our authority records), so much the better.

 

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 9:42 AM, Amy Turner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Like many catalogs, Duke’s includes a link for reporting errors.  I have found that in the rare cases when a change is requested for a heading, there is about a 90% likelihood that the person making the request is the author in question.  Patrons aren’t beating down the doors for more accurate headings.  They find what they want (or not) and go on.  The catalog we labor over is an invisible tool.  Yes, I lot of what we do is essential to its functioning, but a lot isn’t.

 

Amy

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Will Evans
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 9:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

> A case could be made that it would be better to leave the heading uncorrected until linked data makes the issues of cross references and bibliographic file maintenance obsolete

 

Hmm. Should our patrons have to wait that long? Should we? Yes, look ahead, but we need solutions for the here and now.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will Evans

National Endowment for the Humanities

Chief Librarian in Charge of Technical Services

Library of the Boston Athenaeum

10 1/2 Beacon Street

Boston, MA   02108

 

Tel:  617-227-0270 ext. 243

Fax: 617-227-5266 

www.bostonathenaeum.org

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Amy Turner
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 9:12 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

Thanks Paul.  Off on a tangent, let’s compare “egregiously incorrect” with the wording about the change in the death date “no longer thought to be correct.”   We’ve had a lot of discussion on this list about when to correct a heading, and this one falls into a grey area.  There is no conflict, and there are sources supporting two different death dates.  Cataloger’s judgment comes into play here.  A case could be made that it would be better to leave the heading uncorrected until linked data makes the issues of cross references and bibliographic file maintenance obsolete.

 

Amy

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frank, Paul
Sent: Thursday, June 09, 2016 8:51 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

Hi everyone,

 

Adam is correct that a 4XX variant would not be made when correcting a “big typo” in a 1XX field. The phrase “egregiously incorrect” is the somewhat more formal NACO phrase for “big typo.”

 

Paul  

 

Paul Frank

Acting Coordinator, NACO and SACO Programs

Cooperative Programs Section

Cooperative and Instructional Programs Division

Library of Congress

101 Independence Ave., SE

Washington, DC 20540-4230

202-707-1570

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 10:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] death date changed; 400?

 

Mary Jane,

 

I think in most cases no 400 is made at all in this situation, suppressed or not.  But I will defer to NACO Coop folks at LC, and wait to hear what they suggest.

 

Adam

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cuneo, Mary Jane
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 6:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: death date changed; 400?

 

In such a case (big typo) is a 400, suppressed, useful for automated processes performing flips?

mjc

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 6:36 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: death date changed; 400?

 

I agree with Everett.

 

I think there’s a difference between your example and something like this:

 

Correcting the access point Smith, John, $d 1920-9185 to Smith, John, $d 1920-1985

In a case like this, there is a simple typo in the access point, which needs to be corrected, but I would not make a 4XX for the form that had the typo.

 

Adam

 

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Julian Everett Allgood
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 3:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: death date changed; 400?

 

Mary Jane :

Hi -- in a situation like the one you describe in which you are changing what was a previously valid 1XX access point, I believe it would be a disservice not to provide a 4XX with the previous form, and subfield $w nne.

It seems to me, there is every probability that the earlier "valid" form of the LC/NAF NAR with the incorrect death date has made it downstream into Bibliographic (and Authority) files within some library ILS systems beyond the national NACO file. That being the case, providing the 4XX cross-reference will allow systems to machine process the flip and will also prevent cataloger confusion.

And yes, when I have provided such NACO cross-references in the past both the DCM Z1 instruction and the NACO Personal Names FAQ always give me pause. My thought has always been though that if the cross-reference I am making was a previously distributed NACO 1XX access point that even one library catalog may have used in a Bib or Authority file, then the cross-reference is necessary.

Isn't that the altruistic point of cataloging for the greater good (i.e., PCC Cataloging)?

my two cents,

everett

 

 

On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Cuneo, Mary Jane <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Hello Collective Wisdom,

 

While working with a personal name record, one of our catalogers discovered that the death date is no longer thought to be correct.  A later edition of the initial reference source has amended the date accordingly, and our cataloger found another relatively recent reference source to corroborate as well.  She has changed the date.  Here’s how the record looks now (the relevant parts).  670-3 and 4 are new:

 

no 2005006024   Tamada, Gyokushūsai, ǂd 1856-1919   [death date was: 1921]

 

670   Jinbutsu refarensu jiten. Meiji, Taisho, Shōwa hen, 2000: ǂb p. 1273 (Tamada Gyokushūsai 2-dai; b. 1856 d. 1921; storyteller active during the Meiji and Taisho periods; famous for Tatsukawa bunko)

670  Nihon choshamei, jinmei tenkyoroku, 2002: ǂb p. 1267 (Tamada Gyokushūsai 2-daimei; b. 1856 d. 1921; storyteller; real name is Katō Manjirō; pen name Gyokurin)

670  Jinbutsu refarensu jiten. Meiji, Taishō, Shōwa (senzen) hen.II,2000-2009, 2010: ǂb p. 1190 (Tamada Gyokushūsai 2-dai; 1856-1919)

670  20-seiki Nihon jinmei jiten = Major 20th-century people in Japan, 2004: ǂb page 1599 (Tamada Gyokushūsai 2-daimei; 1856-1919; storyteller; real name is Katō Manjirō; pen name Gyokurin)

 

DCM Z1, under 4XX (General), says not to make a “4XX access point” from the old form when it contains a date recorded in error.  The NACO Personal Names FAQ #12 says not to add the “inaccurate form” as a “cross reference.”  However,

--in this case the death date was not recorded in error at the time; it reflected what was in reference sources

--a 400 would be helpful for machine processing of flips

--the 400 could be suppressed if it were felt patrons should not see it, so it would not generate a “cross reference” or an “access point”

--maybe patrons would benefit by seeing such a cross reference, since it represents more just than a cataloger’s error

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks,

 

Mary Jane Cuneo

Serials cataloging and NACO

Information and Technical Services

Harvard Library

 




--

*************************

Everett Allgood
Authorities Librarian & Principal Serials Cataloger
New York University Libraries
[log in to unmask]
212 998 2488



 

--

Phyllis J. Jones
Senior Recordings Cataloger   
Conservatory Library
Oberlin College             
Oberlin, OH 44074
Phone: 440/775-5137
           
Email:[log in to unmask]



 

--

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