In the main, the thrust of the discussion paper is an obvious implication of
the ideas in FRAD and of the authority record changes in RDA. It is a
necessary development as we move from construction of headings to creation of
robust, element-configured authority records as the locus of establishing
identities.
My concern for this proposed environment is the adequate presentation of
differentiating information, however tenuous, for such undifferentiated
records. This would facilitate the quick determination by catalogers of a)
which prospective authority record corresponds to an identity to be associated
with a given bibliographic record, and b) whether establishment of another
undifferentiated authority record might be required.
One such solution might be retooling our current authority displays so that
something akin to OCLC's Brief List display (currently configured for
bibliographic records) becomes available for authority records too. For
example, expand an authority search's truncated list entry for "Doe, John. (3)"
to provide the 3 entries:
Doe, John. [author. Book of topic A. 1956.]
Doe, John. [editor. Book on topic B. 1999.]
Doe, John. [performer. [SR]. Music to remember. 2010.]
(Caveat, the above examples are made up with absolutely no coherent regard for
current authority record practice or potential RDA authority information.)
It is also possible that a new bibliographic framework, which could provide a
comprehensive overall picture of entities in the various FRBR entity groups
rather than bifurcating our records into bibliographic and authority silos, may
address this concern in a better manner.
Whatever the solution turns out to be, I would encourage exploration of this
question of presentation, as we progress towards implementation of individual
records for name entities with non-unique headings.
John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian
Schaffer Library, Union College
807 Union St.
Schenectady NY 12308
518-388-6623
mye...@union.edu
Forwarded on behalf of the PCC Policy Committee. Please excuse duplication.
Please cc c...@loc.gov<mailto:c...@loc.gov> on all responses.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:
[PCCLIST] Undifferentiated personal names: call for community discussion
The Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Committee (PoCo) has been
monitoring the discussion on various cataloging email lists over the past
months and noticed a recurring topic of (and frustration with) authority
records for undifferentiated personal names. We wondered whether this was a
problem that we should tackle now, in conjunction with the imminent changes to
the LC/NACO authority file to align it with RDA implementation. Even though
this is not an RDA issue, we decided yes.
Two PoCo leaders, Philip Schreur and John Riemer, volunteered to prepare a
discussion paper, which is attached to this message and is posted on the PCC
web
site<http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/FAQ_PCC%20Day%20One%20for%20RDA%20Authority%20Records.doc>.
We invite community comment on this discussion paper beginning now through
June 22, 2012. The discussion will continue in person at the PCC Participants
Meeting at the ALA Annual Conference in Anaheim. There are several options for
you to provide input, and the PCC Secretariat has agreed to compile the issues
for the discussion. To participate in this discussion, you may: (1) send
your comments privately to the PCC Secretariat at
c...@loc.gov<mailto:c...@loc.gov>; (2) post your comments publicly to one of
the cataloging email lists, preferably PCCLIST, with a cc to c...@loc.gov; (3)
voice your comments in person at the PCC Participants Meeting at the ALA Annual
Conference in Anaheim in June. While PoCo members will be reading the
comments, we will not be able to respond to each comment.
We expect that the community comments in the coming months will help us prepare
for and design the public forum on this topic at the PCC Participants Meeting,
and will enable those unable to attend that meeting to participate. We are
particularly interested in hearing from authorities and ILS vendors, and hope
that providing this discussion paper now gives them time to think and react.
We also welcome reactions from the international community, especially from
CEAL, where we know this topic has particular impact.
