From a practical point of view, I would discourage the proliferation of variant access points distinguished by qualifiers in the same general field or activity. "Painter" and "illustrator"? No. "Painter" and "accountant"? Possibly.

 

Deborah J. Leslie, MA, MLS | Senior Cataloger, Folger Shakespeare Library | [log in to unmask] | 201 East Capitol Street, S.E. | Washington, DC 20003 | 202.675-0369 | orcid.org 0000-0001-5848-5467

 

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
Sent: Wednesday, 22 March, 2017 13:00
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] 400 for variant $c qualifier?

 

 

At that point, I suppose it will be a matter of cataloger's judgment and any forthcoming changes to LC-PCC PS to encourage or discourage any particular variants.

 

Matt

 

Bob: And I hope there won’t be any such LC-PCC Policy Statements. A conscious decision was made at the beginning of RDA to leave the decision about whether to include variants or not up to the cataloger’s judgment. I’m in favor of leaving it that way.

 

Bob

 

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Noble, Richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From an acting (not real, I just play one) NACO Coordinator:

 

One of our catalogers is including/adding 400s differentiated only by a variant $c qualifiers for field of activity/profession, e.g. 100 with (Painter), 400 with (Illustrator), for the same form of name. Nothing like this in RDA 9.19.2, which, granted, does not abound with permutations of variation.

 

Is this legit? I've seen (or can recall) no examples.

 

RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY

BROWN UNIVERSITY  ::  PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912  ::  401-863-1187



 

--

-- 
Matthew C. Haugen
Rare Book Cataloger
102 Butler Library
Columbia University Libraries
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: 212-851-2451