Hi Michael,

 

I don’t think you need $w for the 400 field because the 400 is justified by the 670 LAC in VIAF, viewed Feb. 6, 2017 $b (authorized access point: Colmers, Eva M., 1953-).

 

It is not an earlier form that was already in the NAF.

 

I have not been including field 016 at all because the manual has “This field may appear in authority records emanating from national bibliographic agencies. Do not modify or delete this field.” LAC currently does not contribute to the NAF.

 

In addition, NACO contributors are not required to search LAC in VIAF any longer, so they often create authorities for those who they may not realize are Canadians, and they may not have consulted LAC in VIAF to view the form LAC uses.

 

I was instructed to control the access points in OCLC for all the records catalogued in English when updating a name.

 

I suppose we are not all doing this extra work? There are several that would need to change for Eva Colmers.

 

Best wishes, Karen

 

Karen Jensen

Head, Cataloguing and Collection Maintenance
Concordia University Library

Collection Services

7141 Sherbrooke Street West, VL-301-60

Montreal, QC  H4B 1R6

(514) 848-2424, ext. 7749

Fax: (514) 848-2898

[log in to unmask]

 

 

 

I have established Eva Colmers as Colmers, Eva (Eva M.), 1953-.  LAC has established her as Colmers, Eva M., 1953-, but I did not feel that I could follow this.  The only time that I could see that she used her middle initial was on (what else?) her dissertation, on which the Canadian authority record was based.  In all of her other works, and on social media, she omits her middle initial.

 

This does leave me uncertain as to whether I should have included the control number of the Canadian record in subfield $z of 016, and whether I should have included a subfield $w at the end of the 400 field.  Corrections welcome.

 

Michael S. Borries

Cataloger, City University of New York

151 East 25^th Street, 5^th Floor

New York, NY  10010

Phone: (646) 312-1687

Email: [log in to unmask]