We’ve encountered cases like this, where there might, slightly redundantly, be one collective conference for each individual conference, just to carry the reference structure.
LC-PCC-PS for 220.127.116.11 says: “For ongoing conferences, separate authority records may be created for the collective conference”.
Generally a new collective conference NAR is created when a conference changes its name, so “ongoing conference” in this PS has to mean “ongoing conference with the same name”. In the case under consideration, there is no ongoing conference with the same name, as each name occurs only once – and they can’t be treated as variants. So no collective conference name exists, and there can be no collective NARs.
The PS finishes: “A record for the collective conference should always be made to connect the earlier and later names of the collective conference”
There’s nothing there to say that see-also references can’t be made between individual conference names, when no collective name exists. Each is very much a predecessor of the next.
What would be useful?
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
Yeah, in a situation like this one, I think the see also references would be better on the individual conference names and no collective conference name records made at all.
University of Washington Libraries
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of John Hostage <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 6:48:37 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: names of individual conferences/meetings
According to LC-PCC PS for 18.104.22.168 and 22.214.171.124, the see also references would be made only on the record for the collective conferences, but it does seem a little excessive when each name has only one occurrence.
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917
Yes, the primary source of information for the preferred name are resources issued by the bodies, and the name as found on the title page. You’re not required to do further research unless you have a conflict between two entities that have the same preferred name. The only thing you have to determine is whether “Working Girls Societies”, “Working Girls’ Clubs”, and “Working Women’s Clubs” are corporate bodies in and of themselves. If they are, then you would have subordinate entry instead of the direct entry you show below. It doesn’t seem as if any of them could be considered entities unto themselves, so I think the access points you have given below are correct.
If authority records were being established for these conferences, they could be linked together using see also references for the earlier and later names.
University of Washington Libraries
I have the conference proceedings of 3 conferences/conventions/meetings. As far as I can tell, they are all the same conference series. However, the name of each is different. I am doing monographic cataloging and I want to construct an AAP for each individual conference. Is it as simple as choosing the preferred name directly from the piece?
National Convention of Working Girls Societies $n (1st : $d 1890 : $c New York, N.Y.)
National Convention of Working Girls’ Clubs $n (2nd : $d 1894 : $c New York, N.Y.)
National Convention of Working Women’s Clubs $n (3rd : $d 1897 : $c New York, N.Y.)