It’s pretty looking but one wonders whether, particularly in this example, users are just as well served by:
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine
SEE ALSO SUCCESSOR University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
SEE ALSO PREDECESSOR University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine
SEE ALSO PREDECESSOR University of Washington. Department of Pathology
University of Washington. Department of Pathology
SEE ALSO SUCCESSOR University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
Though I suppose that is a question of system design not metadata. You could tell some future system, “treat mergers as successors for the purpose of display.” (No system that I know of does this right now but in theory.)
Ben Abrahamse
Metadata Librarian
MIT Libraries
[log in to unmask]
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2020 9:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] CB merges
And remember, if our 5XXs get displayed as "see also" references in a public catalog browse index, they use the inverse of the authority record's relationship designator or predicate. To avoid blind references, the use of a term as a 1XX prompts the indexing of the 5XX term as an access point. So, borrowing Adam's first example:
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Mergee: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (A)
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Mergee: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (B)
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Component of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine (C)
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Component of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology (D)
becomes
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine
SEE ALSO MERGEE
University of Washington. Department of Pathology
SEE ALSO PRODUCT OF MERGER
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (derived from C)
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
SEE ALSO COMPONENT OF MERGER
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine (derived from A)
University of Washington. Department of Pathology (derived from B)
University of Washington, Department of Pathology
SEE ALSO MERGEE
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine
SEE ALSO PRODUCT OF MERGER
University of Washington. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology (derived from D)
Like Ginger Rogers, dancing the same dance in high heels and backwards.
Stephen
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 6:41 AM Young, William C <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
I may not have recorded the relationship between corporate bodies that have merged, but I have always recorded the names of both of the previous bodies and included the relationship between the two with a note in the 670 field.
Our Authorities Librarian said she could always tell when a serials cataloger created an authority record, because this was something that monograph catalogers never thought of.
- Hank
William C. (Hank) Young
CONSER Coordinator
George A. Smathers Libraries
University of Florida
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Hostage, John
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 5:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] CB merges
[External Email]
Unlike with serials, we have never formally recorded relationships between two bodies that merged (nor two bodies that resulted from a split). Is there any reason to start now?
------------------------------------------
John Hostage
Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger
Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services
Langdell Hall 194
Harvard Law School Library
Cambridge, MA 02138
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice)
+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)
ISNI 0000 0000 4028 0917
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adam L Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 16:53
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] CB merges
Bob,
Here's a real life example that I have been working on: the University of Washington Department of Laboratory Medicine and the Department of Pathology merged on July 1, 2020 to form the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology.
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Mergee: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Mergee: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Component of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Laboratory Medicine
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Component of merger: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Pathology
Splits also present complications and, interestingly, there is no relationship designator to relate the two resulting bodies to each other. There are only designators to relate the earlier name to each of the resulting names and the resulting name to the two earlier names:
The University of Washington Department of Periodontics and Endodontics split into the Department of Endodontics and the Department of Periodontics:
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics and Endodontics
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of split: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Endodontics
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Product of split: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Endodontics
510 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Predecessor of split: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics and Endodontics
110 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics
510 2 University of Washington. ǂb Department of Endodontics
510 2 ǂw r ǂi Predecessor of split: ǂa University of Washington. ǂb Department of Periodontics and Endodontics
--Adam
Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Robert Maxwell <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 12:49 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: CB merges
Some clear examples of real situations in the documentation would be helpful. Adam, do you have a real example in mind and could you show what the designators would be on the authority records (presumably three records in a simple situation, one for each of the two original bodies and one for the resulting merged body)?
Bob
Robert L. Maxwell
Ancient Languages and Special Collections Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Adam L Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 1:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: CB merges
Ben,
The way I explain this to people is that the relationship designator always spells out the relationship between the body in the 1XX and the body in the 5XX. It is not used to relate two 5XXs.
So the relationship between the two bodies that merge is reciprocal and "Mergee" is used. The relationship between each of the earlier names to the merged result is "Product of merger" in one direction and "Component of merger" in the other.
Adam Schiff
University of Washington Libraries
________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Benjamin A Abrahamse <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 11:57 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: CB merges
So for all it’s worth I did look at the PCC-List archives because I remembered this coming up before, but the discussion does not seem to have concluded in a definitive way.
I’m trying to figure out how best to handle the merging of two corporate bodies to form a new one. In this case the evidence from the sources is extremely clear (literally a press release saying, “Body A and Body B have merged to form Body C”) so I’m just a little puzzled how to handle the RDA relationship designators.
In Appendix K we have a relationship designator, “Mergee” (reciprocal form: “Mergee”) as well as “Product of merger” (reciprocal form: “Component of merger”). Because it’s not clearly spelled out in the appendix, is the intention here that we should use the first term to relate the two merging bodies to each other, and the second to relate the merging bodies to the new body?
E.g.
Body A
Mergee: Body B
Product of merger: Body C
Body B
Mergee: Body A
Product of merger: Body C
Body C
Component of merger: Body A
Component of merger: Body B
In viewing the archives I found an interesting mention from 2014 that SCT suggested we don’t use “merge” language and instead rely on just “Predecessor” and “Successor”. That was in reference to the PCC Guidelines for the Application of Relationship Designators in NACO Records” but that language no longer seems to appear in the document (as of the 2019 version.)
--Ben
Ben Abrahamse
Metadata Librarian
MIT Libraries
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
--
Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
170A Wilson Library (office)
160 Wilson Library (mail)
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID: 0000-0002-3590-1242
