[RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
smime.p7m Description: S/MIME encrypted message
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
I would agree with Adam that the 100 field should be corrected. Since the 400 field has the |c, I would take its absence in the 100 to be simply a typo or somebody's oversight. 100 1_ |a Wiggin, Ender (Fictitious character) --- 400 1_ |a Wiggin, Andrew |c (Fictitious character) It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes, Sherlock |c (Fictitious character). Do others agree? If I were still at a NACO library, I might go ahead and correct both headings (unless I've missed something somewhere with regard to the Holmes heading). Michael Bernhard Cataloger, Library Materials Support Services Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Library System 501 Copper Avenue NW Albuquerque, NM 87102 Tel: (505) 768-5119 Email: mbernh...@cabq.gov http://www.cabq.gov/library -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of FOGLER, PATRICIA A GS-11 USAF AETC AUL/LTSC Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 11:39 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character) Thanks. I thought that must be the case but needed the validation. As Michelle Cronquist noted, I'm seeing a mix of records with the |c variously applied or not. I'm still not at all comfortable with the reissued name authority record for Holmes, Sherlock. But that's probably just my inexperience with fiction cataloging. I enjoy reading it, I just don't get the opportunity to catalog it much. //SIGNED// Patricia Fogler Chief, Cataloging Section (AUL/LTSC) Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center DSN 493-2135 Comm (334) 953-2135 -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam Schiff Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 12:24 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character) The first one is simply incorrect and should be fixed. The other designation element (Fictitious character) should be coded in $c of the personal name. Adam Schiff University of Washington Libraries -Original Message- From: FOGLER, PATRICIA A GS-11 USAF AETC AUL/LTSC Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 7:07 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character) I'm working through today's name authority changes wondering why I'm finding: ‡a Wiggin, Ender (Fictitious character) but ‡a Wiggin, Peter ‡c (Fictitious character) Is this simply two different agencies interpreting the rules differently?
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
Bernhard, S. Michael mbernh...@cabq.gov wrote: It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes, Sherlock |c (Fictitious character). Do others agree? If I were still at a NACO library, I might go ahead and correct both headings (unless I've missed something somewhere with regard to the Holmes heading). Nothing missed. The authority record was created before July of this year when Fictitous character monikers and such were sanctioned for use in RDA. No one's gotten around to updating the 100 and 368 fields yet. (The 040 $d DLC, it seems, refers to the merging of the old subject heading record to http://lccn.loc.gov/no2013039964.) -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
No one should be correcting authorized access points that were correctly established under current policy, which is to include the qualifier if there is a conflict but otherwise not. Bob Robert L. Maxwell Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger 6728 Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 (801)422-5568 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: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:27 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character) Bernhard, S. Michael mbernh...@cabq.govmailto:mbernh...@cabq.gov wrote: It seems to me, too, that the heading for Holmes should be Holmes, Sherlock |c (Fictitious character). Do others agree? If I were still at a NACO library, I might go ahead and correct both headings (unless I've missed something somewhere with regard to the Holmes heading). Nothing missed. The authority record was created before July of this year when Fictitous character monikers and such were sanctioned for use in RDA. No one's gotten around to updating the 100 and 368 fields yet. (The 040 $d DLC, it seems, refers to the merging of the old subject heading record to http://lccn.loc.gov/no2013039964.) -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote: No one should be “correcting” authorized access points that were correctly established under current policy, which is to include the qualifier if there is a conflict but otherwise not. But the material of 9.6.1.7 falls under the 9.19.1.2 group of additions that are applied to AAPs regardless of conflict. Unless you're referring to the core status laid out in the back half of the blue text below 9.6. Did I miss something here? -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
In a message to the PCC list dated September 4, 2013, Kate James of the LC Policy and Standards Division addressed this issue (with reference to the record for Holmes, Sherlock): *** ... Regarding the issue of whether 9.19.1.2 f) should be applied, this is a source of ongoing debate because of the contradiction between the Core Element statement at 9.6 and the instruction in 9.19.1.1. 9.6 says, Other designation associated with the person is a core element for a Christian saint or a spirit. For other persons, other designation associated with the person is a core element when needed to distinguish a person from another person with the same name. However, 9.19.1.1 says to make the additions specified in 9.19.1.2 regardless of whether they are needed to break a conflict. The intent of the JSC in approving 6JSC/BL/3 and 6JSC/BL/4 last year was NOT to automatically add the additions specified in 9.19.1.2 e), f), and g). However, because 9.19.1.1 was not changed, we are left with a contradiction. So for now, it is a valid interpretation to say that when creating a new NAR, you add a term of the type in 9.19.1.2 e), f), and g) even in cases of non-conflict, and it is also a valid interpretation to say that when creating a new NAR, you only add a term of the type in 9.19.1.2 e), f), and g) to break a conflict. Since this is an existing NAR, you should not change the 1XX form unless a the need to break a conflict arises. The British Library has done another JSC proposal to address this contradiction (6JSC/BL/13). This new proposal will be discussed at the JSC meeting in DC in November 2013. ... Kate James Policy and Standards Division Library of Congress *** Robert L. Maxwell Ancient Languages and Special Collections Cataloger 6728 Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 (801)422-5568 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: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of M. E. Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 2:49 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character) Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edumailto:robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote: No one should be correcting authorized access points that were correctly established under current policy, which is to include the qualifier if there is a conflict but otherwise not. But the material of 9.6.1.7 falls under the 9.19.1.2 group of additions that are applied to AAPs regardless of conflict. Unless you're referring to the core status laid out in the back half of the blue text below 9.6. Did I miss something here? -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Thanks RE: [RDA-L] RDA name authorities |c (Fictitious character)
Robert Maxwell robert_maxw...@byu.edu wrote: In a message to the PCC list dated September 4, 2013, Kate James of the LC Policy and Standards Division addressed this issue (with reference to the record for “Holmes, Sherlock”): Thanks for the reminder, Bob. Looking through my inbox, I held on to and highlighted Kate's original message, but don't remember having read it. I'm also one who expects these sorts of details--temporary though they are--to be posted somewhere on the NACO site if not in the LC-PCC PS. -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
