Since I think this discussion started with the earlier discussion about qualifiers in authorized access points: Just to remind everyone, 220.127.116.11 is an instruction for recording an element in an RDA description (authority record) of a corporate body; when a corporate body has a national, state, provincial, etc., character, then the place is to be recorded—as an element. This instruction can be fulfilled in a MARC authority description by recording the place name in a 370 field. (Yes, PCC policy says the instruction can also be fulfilled by including the place in a qualifier in the authorized access points, but in most cases this is unnecessary.)
I am unable to find a parallel requirement in 11.13, the instructions for creating access points, requiring the addition of a place name within a qualifier in an authorized access point for a body that has a national, state, provincial, etc., character.
With a few exceptions, the required additions in 11.13 are for cases where one authorized access point needs to be distinguished from another (i.e. cases of conflict); optionally these additions can be made “if the addition assists in the identification of the corporate body”; this latter is a judgment call on the part of the cataloger and in my experience instances are rare where the body’s name needs assistance in identification except for cases where the body’s name does not convey the idea of a corporate body (in which case the addition is required). It is a judgment call, yes, but in my opinion “identification” does not mean “the name tells everything about the body, where it is, what it does, how long it’s been around, if it’s a government body or private, and so if it doesn’t do those things we need to add a qualifier”; rather it means that the name adequately identifies the body so that people don’t confuse it with another body.
So in the cases of the National League access points, as far as the authorized access point is concerned, it doesn’t really matter if the body is national, international, or local. Unless there are more than one with the same name, they are adequately identified without qualification.
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
The National Football League, which I believe is actually only in U.S. cities, has no qualifier either. Neither does the National Basketball Association, which does have a team in Toronto.
I don’t think any of the three “National” leagues actually has “a character that is national, state, provincial, etc.” “National” is just a name. Therefore there is no reason to apply RDA 18.104.22.168. As far as I know, there is no other corporate body by any of these three names, so a place name is not needed for distinguishing (22.214.171.124). And I don’t think adding a place name would really help in the identification of the body (also 126.96.36.199).
Dear PCCLIST ([log in to unmask]) readers,
This follows the recent discussion with subject Qualifier In 4XX That Already Identifies Superior Body In Hierarchy.
Consider this NAR: LCCN n 80085263 National Hockey League. It doesn't have a qualifier. No rule, instruction or guideline was to my knowledge broken. For those who don’t know (and one shouldn’t assume that all readers of this list do): the National Hockey League, which some might consider a Canadian body, and originated there, actually has its headquarters and many more members in the United States. More here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Hockey_League
Without a qualifier, is the educational function of the catalog being fulfilled? What concern should we have for advising the person who doesn’t know that this “national” body is actually international in membership?
Sincerely - Ian P.S. In case you’re wondering: No, I didn’t go looking for trouble! At my desk: Hockey fight in Canada : the big media faceoff over the NHL. OCLC 1044621846. I can update the NAR right away, breaking all the rules, of course.
Cataloging and Metadata Services Librarian
George Mason University