 |
 |
My thanks for Matthew's and Benjamin's responses. I was about to convey to our cataloger pretty much what the latter said: "The purpose of qualifiers is to make a name unique, not to express every possible career that an individual has had." This qualifier is adequate for that purpose, and correct as to the person's principal vocation; thus no purpose is served by a 400 with a variant qualifier, though the additional 670 information about other activities aids in correct application of the AP. Happiness all round. Consider what a comprehensive qualifier for a truly "Renaissance" person might look like ... RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187 <Richard_Noble@Br <[log in to unmask]>own.edu> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Matthew C. Haugen < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Richard, you're not alone in questioning this. I also recall a > discussion on PCC list earlier this year. RDA as written would seem to > prevent the construction of variant access points based on a preferred > name, but these types of variants nonetheless appear frequently in the NAF. > > That said, ALA has submitted an RDA revision proposal seeking to clarify > this issue and to provide greater flexibility to construct variant access > points based on a preferred name. > > http://www.rda-rsc.org/RSC/ALA/3 > > But we will have to see what the RSC decides on this proposal during their > meeting in Frankfurt, in a couple weeks. > > Matt > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Benjamin A Abrahamse <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> I think this has come up before on the pcc list so you may want to search >> the archive for a fuller discussion. But if you look to the rules: RDA >> 9.19.1 on constructing access points states, “When constructing an >> authorized access point to represent a person, use the *preferred name* >> for the person (see 9.2.2) as the basis for the authorized access point.” >> Whereas, 9.19.2 on variant access points says, “When constructing a variant >> access point to represent a person, use a *variant name* for the person >> (see 9.2.3) as the basis for the access point.” >> >> >> >> RDA does not state, “Use the preferred name for a variant access point.” >> >> I’m sure some would argue that there are problems with this approach, and >> indeed there may be other situations in which you would want to use the >> preferred name plus a different set of qualifiers. But at least in these >> cases, it strikes me as gilding the lilly. The purpose of qualifiers is to >> make a name unique, not to express every possible career that an individual >> has had. >> >> >> >> >> >> Benjamin Abrahamse >> >> Cataloging Coordinator >> >> Acquisitions & Discovery Enhancement >> >> MIT Libraries >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask] >> OV] *On Behalf Of *Noble, Richard >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 26, 2016 12:33 PM >> *To:* [log in to unmask] >> *Subject:* [PCCLIST] Variant Parenthetical Designation as 400 >> >> >> >> I'm being presented with ARs for a name with a variant parenthetical >> designation as a 400, e.g. "100 Name (Teacher of mathematics)" and "400 >> Name (Mathematician)"; in another case "100 Name (Pianist)" and a newly >> added "400 Name (Composer and pianist)" in response to information >> presented in a newly cited source. >> >> >> >> This doesn't seem quite right somehow, but I can't find any positive >> negative example (so to call it) to justify my uneasiness. >> >> >> >> With thanks from a less than coordinated Acting NACO Coordinator - >> >> >> >> RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY >> >> BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187 >> >> <Richard_Noble@Br <[log in to unmask]>own.edu> >> > > > > -- > > -- > Matthew C. Haugen > Rare Book Cataloger > 102 Butler Library > Columbia University Libraries > E-mail: [log in to unmask] > Phone: 212-851-2451 > >