The actual rules in the LCRIs are at https://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/22-17-22-20-additions-to-distinguish-identical-names "22.17-22.20. Additions to Distinguish Identical Names". Although flourished dates are allowed, they are sixth of seven in order of preference. Therefore, they were trying to reduce the use of flourished dates. -- *James Weinheimer* weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com *First Thus* http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ *Cooperative Cataloging Rules* http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ *Cataloging Matters Podcasts* http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
On 23/07/2012 16:14, Kelleher, Martin wrote: > Strange, then... I've been labouring under the illusion we were dissenters > all this time, whereas actually we were entirely conformist! > > Well, I'm not sure what we'll go for in the end - although I think locally > we'll probably prefer fl./flourished/active over adding occupations, not > least because of the issue of polymathy, but these things are yet to be > deterimined.... > > Cheers! > > Martin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard > Sent: 23 July 2012 13:42 > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Christianity-centric terminology in RDA > > A quick search on our local copy of the LC/NAF reveals 28332 personal name > headings containing the characters "fl". That will include some name-titles. > > The LCRI limited its use, except exceptionally, to spans of dates and to > pre-20th century persons. Neither RDA nor the LCPS has either of those > limitations. So in theory you could break a conflict with "active 1989" > when a sole publication was known, though a qualifier for the person's > occupation would almost always be more helpful. Which is why the LCPS for > 9.19.1.1 advises the use of judgement in selecting the best qualifier, rather > than rigidly following the RDA order of precedence in 9.19.14-9.19.1.6. > > Regards > Richard > > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kelleher, Martin > Sent: 23 July 2012 12:43 > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Christianity-centric terminology in RDA > > Odd we didn't get many fl.s, then - so did NACO used to have neither 'active' > or 'fl.'? Seems to be on the MARC21 pages....I'm pretty sure they used to be > filtered out according to 1 protocol or another, or perhaps it was just an > unpopular practice...... > > I'm not sure whether 'active' is a better term or not - assuming you continue > to limit to a single date, it'll look like whoever is being 'dated' was only > active for a year (perhaps in torpor the rest of the time?), whereas > flourished has more of a meaning of initialising. > > Activated? I suppose at least 'active' is a relatively short, uncluttering > word! > > Martin > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Moore, Richard > Sent: 23 July 2012 11:53 > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Christianity-centric terminology in RDA > > Yes, "fl." was allowed in AACR2. You'll find it in the examples in AACR2 > 22.17A, and in many headings across the LC/NAF. > > Although the examples in RDA 9.19.1.5 spell it out as "Flourished", NACO > practice follows the LCPS for 9.19.1.1, and prefers "Active". I suppose one > can be active, without necessarily flourishing. > > Regards > Richard > > _________________________ > Richard Moore > Authority Control Team Manager > The British Library > > Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806 > E-mail: richard.mo...@bl.uk > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kelleher, Martin > Sent: 23 July 2012 10:07 > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Christianity-centric terminology in RDA > > I have never heard (or at least registered) the term common era before, and > if I ever saw the term CE, I'd probably think it was something to do with > either EU product standards or perhaps the Church of England..... > mind you, I still expect RDA to regulate what I eat, rather than how I > catalogue..... > > Anyway, as a replacement term I'm sure it's Doubleplusgood! Oh hang on is > that what I meant? What's that other opinion..... can't quite think of the > term..... express...... ;-) > > Anyway, Fl. wasn't allowed under AARC2 was it? I thought that was one of the > more reasonable (re)introductions of RDA, albeit characteristically spelled > out in the closest English term, in case it doesn't clutter the record enough > as an abbreviation? ;-) > > Martin Kelleher > Electronic Resources/Bibliographic Services Librarian University of Liverpool > > > ************************************************************************ > ** > Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/ > > The British Library's new interactive Annual Report and Accounts 2010/11 > : http://www.bl.uk/annualreport2010-11http://www.bl.uk/knowledge > > Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. > http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook > > The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled > > ************************************************************************ > * > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally > privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the > intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the > mailto:postmas...@bl.uk : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed > or copied without the sender's consent. > > The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author > and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British > Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. > > ************************************************************************ > * > Think before you print > > ************************************************************************** > Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/ > > The British Library’s new interactive Annual Report and Accounts 2010/11 : > http://www.bl.uk/annualreport2010-11http://www.bl.uk/knowledge > > Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. > http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook > > The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled > > ************************************************************************* > > The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally > privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the > intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the > mailto:postmas...@bl.uk : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed > or copied without the sender's consent. > > The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author > and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British > Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author. > > ************************************************************************* > Think before you print
