It isn’t so unusual and I’ve ‘done’ this both ways. I think the preferred way is to go with option 1, but it does take more time.
Mary Charles Lasater
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Robert Bratton
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 8:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] To create a new NAR, or differentiate the undifferentiated one?
This is an unusual case indeed!
Strictly speaking, I think you would go with option 1 since the NAR is an undifferentiated record (Name = b). I believe the point is that we never convert an undifferentiated NAR to a differentiated one, even if the two identities actually represent the same entity.
Perhaps a more astute NACO participant will weigh in with a more definitive response.
Jacob Burns Law Library
George Washington University
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Ian Fairclough <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Thanks to Mary Jane Cuneo for asking whether the NAR had previously included other identities - and my apologies for not saying in my first message. I did check the previous versions of the NAR in Connexion (a very useful service) and found no other identities. As Mary Jane says, one could not exercise the second option if other identities from past versions are found.
Nevertheless, further guidance in DCM Z1 might help - particularly to avoid having a undifferentiated NAR reworked as a differentiated one in cases where another identity was indeed previously present. Instructions might advise catalogers to consult the LC superseded versions. I wonder if that can only be done in Connexion, or if rival systems also have that capability.
Sincerely - Ian
Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian
George Mason University