Print

Print


Dear PCCLIST readers,

 

Can someone please explain why, in this name authority record:

n  86019386

1101 United States. ǂb Department of Defense. ǂb Office of the Secretary of Defense

4101 United States. ǂb Office of the Secretary of Defense

-- the AAP is subordinate?  And has been since the NAR was created, under AACR2. 

 

LCRI 24.19 has this:  If the name of the body being established does not fit either of the above obvious categories, consider whether or not the name would be appropriate for another subordinate body within the same corporate structure.  Common sense will be the best guide, but in some doubtful cases it may be relatively easy to make the decision if an important idea expressed in a word or phrase present in the higher body's name is missing from the name of the body.

 

I've underlined what seems to be the critical factors.  I don't see how the name "Office of the Secretary of Defense" would be appropriate under any other department of the United States than the Department of Defense.  Nor any important idea not being present. 

 

RDA 11.2.2.15 Direct or Indirect Subdivision does not seem to endorse this treatment either.  Nor does NACO Training Module 4 (Rev. Apr. 7, 2017), slides 54-57.  Am I missing some instruction, either in AACR2, LCRI, or RDA?  Or misunderstanding something about the nature of the U.S. government and its secretaries/offices?

 

Furthermore, there are these instances, which appear to be at variance with each other:

 

·         n  79017997 United States. ǂb Department of Defense. ǂb Director of Net Assessment

·         no2003065002 United States. ǂb Office of the Secretary of Defense for Net Assessment

 

Is this a case of differing cataloger's judgment?

 

Sincerely – Ian

 

Ian Fairclough

Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian

George Mason University

703-993-2938

[log in to unmask]