Print

Print


Others have already provided info about the author using Jr. in some of his publications, and that will be sufficient to break a conflict.  But to comment on some other things, I’ve added comments in red:

You wrote: “I was inclined to establish the name as Bookheim, Bill $q (Louis W.).”

Only if “Bill Bookheim” is the most commonly used form of his name or the name by which he is best known would you choose that as the person’s preferred form of name.  Nothing you provided us leads me to think that “Bill Bookheim” is his preferred name according to RDA.  Including his nickname in parentheses does not indicate to me that his preferred forename is what is in the parentheses.  The 670s must show that he is commonly known as “Bill Bookheim”.

Also, if there is no conflict with any other Bill Bookheim, there’s no need to add a $q qualifier.

You wrote: “Which is a better (or more acceptable) construction:

Bookheim, Louis W. $c (Law librarian) (with a cross reference to Bookheim, Bill)

or

Bookheim, Bill $q (Louis W.)”

Neither RDA nor PCC expresses an order of precedence for which addition to use.  The choice of qualifier between $q and $c is cataloger judgment.

Also, as far as I am aware, whoever says that it is not permissible to give the fuller form of name as a qualifier when a nickname is given as part of a preferred or variant name is incorrect.   The definition of “fuller form of name” (RDA 9.5) is: “A name or names associated with a person that includes the fuller form of a part of any name represented only by an initial, abbreviation, or shortened or otherwise modified variant in the form chosen as the preferred name and/or a part of the name not included in the form chosen as the preferred name.”  I think that “Bill” can be considered a “shortened or otherwise modified variant” of “William”.   It is true, however, that RDA 9.5.1.3 does not include any examples of this situation.  If there is documentation from PCC that disallows this kind of fuller form of name, I’d like to be pointed to it.

Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
[log in to unmask]



From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alexis Zirpoli
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2017 11:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Personal name authority question - preferred name for another Bookheim, Louis W.

Greetings,

I am the NACO coordinator at my library, but I'm newer to this than my co-workers who submit NARs to me for adding to the NAF. Recently someone submitted a NAR to me for Bookheim, Louis W. $c (Law librarian). This Louis W. Bookheim wrote a book under that name, but the book advertisement referred to him as Louis W. (Bill) Bookheim. Research online indicates that he was commonly referred to as Bill.

There is another record for Bookheim, Louis W. who appears to be the father of the author for the book in hand (research of the first Bookheim leads me to believe that he is a "Jr."). Hence the need to qualify the more recent NAR for Louis W. Bookheim.

I was inclined to establish the name as Bookheim, Bill $q (Louis W.). However, the person who submitted this record to me said that it's not okay to qualify a nickname in $q (it doesn't say this in RDA or MARC formats documentation - I was informed that prior to RDA it was not allowed).

I would like to know your collective wisdom on this topic. Which is a better (or more acceptable) construction:

Bookheim, Louis W. $c (Law librarian) (with a cross reference to Bookheim, Bill)

or

Bookheim, Bill $q (Louis W.)

Thanks!

- Alexis

--
Alexis Zirpoli
Cataloging Services Librarian
Interim Continuations & Collection Management Services Unit Leader
University of Michigan Law Library
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
734-647-1563