My reaction matches Robert’s. What you are trying to describe is an architectural drawing, whose title happens to match the name of the building that the drawing is associated with.
My opinion: the architect is the creator of the plan, not the building itself. So if you have I.M. Pei's architectural drawings for the Louvre pyramid, the AAP you give below could be correct (depending on what the preferred title turns out to be). The plans/designs
are not the same work as the building itself, so it would be appropriate to have two different AAPs for those two different entities.
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Yang Wang <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 8:51:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Name/titles for an archtect
Could someone explain to me how to establish name/title authorized access points for an architect?
An AAP for an aggregate, such as an architect’s catalog, is fairly easy to establish (Works. Selections, etc.), but individual works contained in such a compilation seem to fall into a different category of entities, because names of buildings (structures, etc.) are independent NACO or SACO entities. For example, among I.M. Pei’s works,
John F. Kennedy Library (NACO, LCCN n 50082519)
Louvre Pyramid (SACO, not established yet)
For a compilation of selected works by I.M. Pei, we could assign a conventional title as follows:
100 1 Pei, I. M., $d 1917-
240 1 0 Works. $ Selections (qualifier)
But what about “giv[ing] an analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work in the compilation?” How are we supposed to construct name/titles for his individual works? Would the following AAPs be valid?
700 12 Pei, I. M., $d 1917- $t John F. Kennedy Library
700 12 Pei, I. M., $d 1917- $t Louvre Pyramid
If artistic or creative conceptions are considered “works,” then “J.F.K Library” or “Louvre Pyramid” as named entities of Pei’s works would stand as such. Or, in order to make them distinct from the “completed” buildings, should we give them each a qualifier? If so, what would be a good qualifier to use?
P.S. “PCC recommends providing a contents note (no limit on number of works in the contents note unless burdensome). Give an analytical authorized access point for the predominant or first work in the compilation. Additional access points for other related works may also be included at the discretion of the cataloger. See section above for elements used to identify works and expressions.” (page 18, BIBCO
Standard Record (BSR) RDA Metadata Application Profile).