The comments for Slide 40 in the same set say, "RDA 9.3.1.3: Record dates either as parts of the authorized access point representing the person, or as separate elements, or as both. Recording the year alone for birth and death date; add the month or month and day if necessary to distinguish one access point from another." In the case of the Reg Park's , the two AAPs are already distinguished  by the addition of the death year to one of the AAPs, so year alone suffices for the birth date. 

I read slide 80 as referring to a case where the same preferred name and birth year have resulted in identical AAPs, and not as applying generally whenever two people have the same preferred name and birth year regardless of their AAPs--though I agree that it could be read the other way.

Stephen

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Lammert, Richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Slide number 80 in the most recent set of slides for NACO training (found at http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/courses/naco-RDA/index.html) for module 2, Describing persons, has this note: "- 9.3.2.3  Record the person’s date of birth applying the basic instructions on recording dates associated with persons given under 9.3.1.  If the person was born in the same year as another person with the same name, record the date of birth in the form [year] [month] [day]." The date given for this slide is May 1, 2013, so the training has been the same since then.

There is no indication that date of death is to be taken into account. "If the person was born in the same year ..." then the date of birth must be unique.

Richard Lammert

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Stanley Elswick - NOAA Federal <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
When and if the living person dies, the records will remain distinguished. I think it is OK to have them as they are.

Stanley

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:26 PM, Gene Fieg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Presumably, the first one has not died.  Therefore these two records represent two different people.

Gene Fieg

On Friday, February 3, 2017, John Hostage <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Is it permissible to have two NARs that are distinguished by the presence or absence of a death date?  I'm thinking of
Park, Reg, ǂd 1928-
Park, Reg, ǂd 1928-2007

The OCLC control function will generally add a death date automatically to an entry like "Shakespeare, William, 1564-"
but in the case of the 2 Reg Parks it opens a window to choose between the two, which is a good thing.


------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI
0000 0000 4028 0917



--
Stanley Elswick
NOAA Central Library
301.713.2600 x138

Unless stated explicitly otherwise, the content of this msg. reflects only my personal views and not the views of the U.S. Government.



--

Rev. Richard A. Lammert           e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Technical Services Librarian       mail: 6600 N. Clinton St.
Systems Librarian                     Fort Wayne, IN 46825-4916
Kroemer Library                         phone: 260-452-3148
Concordia Theological Seminary




--
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