Print

Print


One of my first questions when re-reading this LC-PS was: whose rules,
instructions are following?  RDA allows us to differentiate; the LC-PCC
instructions says not to go beyond $l field for authority records.

Here is the LC instruction:
When identifying an expression not already represented by a name authority
record, do not add another characteristic to differentiate one such
expression from another expression (e.g., do not differentiate one
translation of Shakespeare’s Hamlet in French from another French
translation; do not differentiate one arrangement of Berlioz’ Corsaire from
another arrangement). Other elements in LC’s bibliographic record (e.g.,
translator, date, medium of performance) are available to the user for
selecting a specific expression if desired; RDA 0.6.6
<http://access.rdatoolkit.org/document.php?id=rdachp0&target=rda0-503#rda0-503>
allows differentiating characteristics to be recorded as separate elements
or as part of the authorized access points. If there is a name authority
record with an authorized access point for an expression that includes an
additional characteristic LC would not have added, use the form of the
access point in that authority record; this action is consistent with the
LC/PCC policy of using authorized access points in existing name authority
records

My other questions is this: if one authority record for a an expression in
the same language and also further qualified, do we have to differentiate
our new entries under the same language, do we have to also further
differentiate our new expression that we have in hand?

Gene Fieg