For reference, here is a recent authority record with 374 (occupation) using an LCSH term:
LDR cz 22 n 4500 001 541951 005 20120514104731.0 008 800520n| acannaabn |a aaa 010 ‡an 79100565 035 ‡a(OCoLC)oca00332681 035 ‡a(DLC)n 79100565 035 ‡a(DLCn)703231 035 ‡a11654658 035 ‡a2898 040 ‡aDLC‡cDLC‡dDLC‡dMoSpS-AV‡dDLC 046 ‡f19020204‡g19740826 100 1 ‡aLindbergh, Charles A.‡q(Charles Augustus),‡d1902-1974 370 ‡aDetroit, Mich.‡bHawaii 374 ‡aAir pilots‡2lcsh 400 1 ‡wnna‡aLindbergh, Charles Augustus,‡d1902-1974 670 ‡aVan Every, D. Charles Lindbergh, his life, 1927. 670 ‡aThe entrepreneurs, an American adventure. Part 3, Expanding America [VR] 1991, c1986:‡bcontainer (Charles Lindbergh; flew across the Atlantic) 670 ‡aFunk and Wagnalls WWW Home page, Dec. 11, 2000:‡bEncyclopedia (Charles Augustus Lindbergh; b. Feb. 4, 1902, Detroit; d. Aug. 26, 1974, Maui, Hawaii; American aviator, engineer, and Pulitzer Prize winner for autobiography, The Spirit of St. Louis; first to make nonstop solo flight across Atlantic; baby son kidnapped and murdered, 1932) Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Sean Chen Sent: May 16, 2012 10:05 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA, DBMS and RDF I agree values for field of activity and occupation elements should come from a controlled vocabulary, if anything to make the job of the person cataloging easier. I think I'd follow what Richard Moore says later on in the the thread: he emphasizes that a Linked Data approach would require this. Also I think the need to move away from the precoordinated Authorized Access Points and think about the rest of the elements that make up an authority record is really important. Or at least to think of them as separate beasts (which RDA does do, depending on your opinion). With field of activity, it seems to me to be less troublesome since a plural doesn't seem to cause too much dissonance in a heading (Economics vs. Economic; Statistics/Statistic) and in other situations LCSH has used a singular form; based on other guidance (Constitutional law vs Constitutional laws). Occupations are a bit more difficult with LCSH using plural a lot more; especially with headings in the category of "classes of people" which is where I think occupations would draw from. On top of that the actual term might often not line up with representation (Chemistry teacher vs. Professor of chemistry). Are there better vocabularies for occupations than LCSH? -- Sean Chen <slc.c...@gmail.com<mailto:slc.c...@gmail.com>> On May 13, 2012, at 11:07 PM, Adam L. Schiff wrote: The elements that constitute authorized access points have been separated out in MARC because of RDA (such as, fuller form of name-- 378; form of work-- 380; dates-- 046, and these are encoded in externally referenced standards -- ISO 8601 and EDTF). Other elements, such as Field of Activity or Occupation can be linked to controlled vocabulary terms, such as LCSH headings. Except that LCSH occupation/profession headings are in the plural, while RDA terms would be in the singular. I'm not at all sure that you could singularize an LCSH heading and still code the subfield $2 of the 374 field for LCSH. What do others think about this? Some ideas for improving RDA that follow from the points raised: - Separate out Authorized Access Points entirely from the numbered instructions. Treat them as a sidebar, and have side-by-side links to the instructions for each individual element so one can see all the relevants instructions as one is constructing an authorized access point. This will further solidify the idea that Authorized Access Points are creatures belonging to some catalog implementations, but may not be needed in others. I'm also beginning to believe that we may need indicators in the MARC fields for the elements that would be included in an authorized access point, so that a machine could generate them on the fly. If you have recorded, for example, multiple professions/occupations, you might want to designate which one should go into the authorized access point. Or you might record one or more professions that would never go into the access point, and you might want to tell the system that too. The same is true for many other elements (e.g. associated place) that are sometimes needed in an access point but which might be recorded even when not needed to differentiate an entity/access point from another. ************************************** * Adam L. Schiff * * Principal Cataloger * * University of Washington Libraries * * Box 352900 * * Seattle, WA 98195-2900 * * (206) 543-8409 * * (206) 685-8782 fax * * asch...@u.washington.edu<mailto:asch...@u.washington.edu> * **************************************
