 |
 |
Who will pay for the time spent doing this? RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187 <Richard_Noble@Br <[log in to unmask]>own.edu> On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 7:05 PM, Ian Fairclough <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > PCCLIST readers, > > > > The question whether conflicts in authorized access points other than > those found in LC's catalog should be resolved came up in discussion > recently. I'm firmly in favor of resolving conflicts within the database > that a cataloger is using, which for many of us will be OCLC WorldCat. > This view is supported in DCM Z1 Introduction: > > > > In constructing authorized access points, variants, and recording > information, NACO participants and LC catalogers not working in the LC > Database may make use of all records on the file against which the > searching and cataloging is being done: OCLC, British Library, SkyRiver, > etc. NACO participants may choose to use only LC records found on the file > being searched. For LC catalogers working in the LC Database, the file is > the set of records comprising the "LC database" (see 670 section of this > document > <http://desktop.loc.gov/search?view=document&doc_action=setdoc&doc_keytype=foliodestination&doc_key=dcmz1670&hash=670>). > In this document, "database" refers to whatever file is being used for > searching and cataloging. > > > > My comments: > > When a personal name access point is unqualified, and the same access > point is used as an undifferentiated heading for various people, it is > appropriate to disambiguate them within the file used. Other NACO > participants may differ with this view, and their viewpoint is supported by > the second sentence in that paragraph. Many catalogers will likely be > subject to the direction of a local policy and/or supervisor. > > > > However, Module 7 “Making Changes to Existing Name and Work/Expression > Authority Records” slide 8 “Why Update an Existing NAR ?” has: To change an > existing *authorized* access point to *resolve a NACO conflict.* Recent > discussion focused on the phrase “NACO conflict”, which seems to be taken > as intending that a conflict is to be resolved only if it occurs between > NACO authority records. That interpretation prevents NACO work from being > undertaken with a view to resolving conflicts within bibliographic > databases such as WorldCat. The rationale for resolving conflicts in > WorldCat is (1) that it helps the users of that database, and (2) when > catalogers encounter a situation that can be improved by their attention to > it, they should be allowed, if not required, to do so. The same might be > said for other bibliographic databases. > > > > Perhaps the phrase “NACO conflict” might be reviewed and replaced in favor > of one which permits a broader application on the part of NACO contributors > other than LC catalogers. > > > > Sincerely - Ian > > > > Ian Fairclough > > Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian > > George Mason University > > 703-993-2938 <(703)%20993-2938> > > [log in to unmask] > > >