For what it’s worth, it certainly helps in our local system (III’s Sierra). When an incoming name authority record includes a 400 with an old form of the heading, our bib records automatically get updated. This is true regardless of the coding of the $w. So, I tend to include such see-references when updating an NAR.
David Procházka | Music/Special Materials Cataloger | The University of Akron | University Libraries | Bierce 261C | Akron, Ohio 44325-1712 | 330-972-6260 | [log in to unmask] | https://works.bepress.com/david-prochazka/
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of The University of Akron.
I don’t know if PCC or LC has a position on whether it is encouraged. I think “cataloger’s judgment” applies. I don’t believe the 400 is needed for database maintenance in OCLC (for headings that are already controlled) or in Alma. I don’t know about other systems. In OCLC, if you press F11 on a heading like “Blow, Joe, 1937-“ it will control and update to “Blow, Joe, 1937-2020” even if there is no 400 on the NAR.
I too have noticed that many updated NARs do not have a reference from the earlier heading, even in cases where it would seem to be required, i.e., it was more than just adding a death date.
Thanks, John. The presence of this example here (it’s the same one used in section 13 of the FAQ, where it appears to represent the case of an AACR2 authority updated to RDA with a new death date incidentally added) certainly implies that the use of such a $w-qualified 400 is allowable, but I’m still curious whether it is encouraged. It is not routinely done, judging from a small sample of recently updated authorities I’ve looked at.
See the NACO Participants’ Manual (https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/naco/) at the bottom of page 60.
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
I have been looking for a firm answer to an old bothersome question and have been unable to find it.
If we add a death date to an RDA personal name authority that already has a birth date, and that is the only change we make to the authorized form, is it allowable to make a 400 with $w nnea for the earlier form without death date? If allowable, is it encouraged?
The old RDA heading is
100:1 : $a Blow, Joe, $d 1937-
After the change:
100:1 : $a Blow, Joe, $d 1937-2020
400:1 : $a Blow, Joe, $d 1937- $w nnea
The FAQ on creating personal name authorities gives an example in section 13 of such a 400 being made, but it is in the context of updating an AACR2 authority record to RDA. I don’t think routinely adding such a 400 in the course of adding a death date to the 100 is required or encouraged, although it can be a boon in automated authority control systems. Am I correct?