Print

Print


The shifting of fictional persons into the NAF is called into question by
the firm stand of the FRBR-LRM report that fictional entities should not be
represented as agents. In earlier posts I pondered whether a relationship
like "Atributed to" might be defined as a creator/contributor relationship
with a wider range than the one FRBR-LRM proposes for creator/contributor
relationships involving agents. The use case in mind is the many Sherlock
Holmes books in our collection attributed on the title page to "Dr. John H.
Watson."

There may be another way to resolve this conflict between how we tag and
how we use entity names. The "Attributed to" relationship might be defined
as a type of subject relationship, in that it conveys a fact about the
resource which is not truly a fact about its creation. Subject is an ever
widening umbrella which (in MARC) has begun to acquire specific
relationship terms and codes. Maybe it could also provide shelter for
"Attributed to".

In that case, we might tag fictional person, corporate body, and place
entities in the NAF using 100, 110, and 151 rather than 150 in LCSH, and in
MARC authorities code these headings as 008/14=b, "not appropriate for use
as a main or added entry."  We'd be refining the scope of NAF and SAF away
from use and toward entity types, which could be an easier division to
grasp for users of the files and the AAPs.

Stephen



On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Netanel Ganin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> [Resending from 9/30 because I think this got trapped in the aether]
>
> G'morning PCC-ers (and a warm Shanah Tovah to fellow Hebes)
>
> I stumbled across this document at the CC:DA site
> http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/?p=1236 on fictitious families and
> corporate bodies. I was quite pleased to see it, as I've oft wondered why
> entities such as
>
>
> *Enterprise (Imaginary space vehicle)*
> *Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry (Imaginary organization)*
>
> were in LCSH rather than the NAF (in parellel with RDA's treatment of
> fictional people)
>
> I was unable (and am fully ready to chalk this up to bad navigational
> skills) to find a response on the RSC site to this proposal. Does anyone
> have any insight into what was the result of this proposal?
>
> 2. Follow up -- has there been a proposal (or immediate rejection of such)
> for fictional places such as
>
> *Oz (Imaginary place)*
>
> *Never-Never Land (Imaginary place)*
> to be entered into the NAF rather than LCSH?
>
>
> best,
>
> Netanel Ganin
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Metadata Coordinator -- Hebrew Specialty
> Brandeis University
> (781) 736-4645 / [log in to unmask]
>
> My pronouns are he/him/his
>
>


-- 
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