I can see no reason based on the information in the NAR or the other people named “Bradley, Patricia” in the database why this NAR would have been changed. We would honor a request from the person or their publisher
to change the (Educator) to something else, but there is no indication of that in the NAR per this portion of the LC-PCC PS for 9.19.1.1, “On rare occasions, a person requests that the formulation of their authorized access point be changed (e.g., to remove
a date of birth or a fuller form of name). LC and PCC should attempt to honor such requests by changing the appropriate fields in the record, and indicate in a note that the person's preference has been followed.”
However, because this heading was changed a few weeks ago and bibliographic records have already been changed, we will leave the 1XX as it is with the exception of adding the comma. I will make the other necessary
corrections including adding a $w nne for the former heading. I will also update the related NARs and update any bibliographic records in LC’s database.
Please note the word “generally” at the beginning of LC-PCC PS for 9.19.1.1. The conditions given below are the normal reasons it would be acceptable to change an authorized access point. However, sometimes
there are other reasons. For example, let’s say there are a dozen people in the database named, “Li, Wenhua” and all of them are Ph. D.s. If none of them have been established that way yet, “Li, Wenhua, $c Ph. D.” may give you a unique string, but it doesn’t
help the user or the cataloger who had to fix 20 bibliographic records because the wrong person was assigned as an access point in them 2 years after you created that NAR. So I would say that adding a date of birth to that 1XX is okay in that situation because
it may prevent future misassignment of the heading and it is in the spirit of conflict breaking.
However, if you have only one person in the database with a name like “Munro, Alice” changing the existing 1XX to add the date of birth just creates more work for people who now have to update their bibliographic
records to the new authorized access point. So that is why we have that Policy Statement and that is why we had a similar LCRI.
FYI, Adam is correct that the $d DLC is not automatically added by our system—it must be done by a macro or typed in.
As long as we are discussing conflict, it’s worth noting that when creating a new NAR and you don’t have dates or a fuller form of name, applying 9.19.1.8 wisely might give you a better string than applying 9.19.1.6.
For example:
Smith, John (Writer)
vs.
Smith, John (Author of 10 hikes through Maine)
I anticipate that example “Smith, John (Author of 10 hikes through Maine)” will be valid after the new Toolkit is released although it may reflect a different addition than Other Designation..
Kate
Kate James
Policy and Standards Division
Library of Congress
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 3:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Unnecessary changes
These changes were done by someone at LC: 040 DLC ǂb eng ǂc DLC ǂe rda
Oddly enough, when they changed the record, they also should have added $d DLC to the 040 and they didn’t. (They have to do this by hand I believe, since they don’t work in OCLC).
Perhaps the Coop team can contact the cataloger who made the changes and ask them to fix the errors in the record?
Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Hostage, John
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2018 8:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Unnecessary changes
The heading Bradley, Patricia $c (Educator) was established in 2013. It’s the pseudonym of a writer of “romance suspense” novels who formerly worked in education.
A couple of weeks ago the heading was changed to Bradley, Patricia ǂd 1945-
Aside from the fact that commas are missing from the 100 and 400, there is no 400 for the earlier heading. Also, there are two author-title series authorities that were not revised.
On the one hand, since she seems to have left her school job in 2008, the qualifier (Educator) might be misleading. On the other hand, it was a valid RDA heading, and is it really worthwhile to be changing such headings? (Things, not
strings.) And if it is worthwhile, shouldn’t it be done completely?
------------------------------------------
John Hostage
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