Robert

 

I once asked a colleague at LC, what they thought about a person's name being 
recorded as the field of activity for a conference about the person; the reply 
was "Like you, I think it looks a little odd and probably is best handled by 
subject headings, but I don't see anything that would prevent its use".

 

We try to use topical terms when we can, but I've had no problem advising my 
cataloguers that the name of a corporate body or person could be appropriate in 
the situations you describe. The name heading for William Shakespeare appears 
in 372 in several LC/NAF NARs.

 

Regards

Richard

_________________________

Richard Moore 

Authority Control Team Manager 

The British Library

                                                          

Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546806                       

E-mail: richard.mo...@bl.uk                             

 

 

________________________________

De: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] En nombre de Robert Bratton
Enviado el: jueves, 14 de noviembre de 2013 22:41
Para: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Asunto: Re: [RDA-L] The meaning of 372 Field of Activity

Hi John,

I have run into situations where I thought a corporate body or personal should 
be a field of activity. If someone has written multiple books about the U.S. 
Supreme Court or biographies of George Washington or critical studies of 
William Shakespeare, why wouldn't we use the corresponding  name AAPs as one of 
the facets of their field of activity?  I believe current NACO policy is that 
we *not* do this, but we do it for geographic entities and political 
jurisdictions -- how are they any different?

So long as this data element is defined as "field or fields of endeavour, area 
or areas of expertise, etc." where else would we record it?

I think most people do need both a Field of activity and a Profession/Occupation

372  $a Copyright $a Intellectual property $2 lcsh
374  $a Lawyers $a Authors $2 lcsh


372  $a International law $a Terrorism--Prevention--Law and legislation $2 lcsh
374  $a Law teachers $a College teachers $a Authors $2 lcsh


372  $a Human rights $2 lcsh
374  $a Human rights workers $2 lcsh

I agree that ideally the Field of activity shouldn't be specific to the one 
resource you're basing the AAP on, but should broadly cover all of the 
person's/body's output.

I think the problem is that the data element is called "Field of activity." 

Robert

 

 

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 3:21 PM, John Hostage <host...@law.harvard.edu> wrote:

I think we've gone way overboard in the application of 372 and 374.  In most 
cases, a person doesn't need both.  Some people seem to have gotten much too 
specific in these fields.  An authority record does not have to be the same as 
a Wikipedia article.  What purpose does that serve?  The examples in RDA 9.15 
are fairly general.  

 

I wouldn't say Stalin was a politician.  I would say he was a dictator and a 
head of state.  If you're looking for another class-of-persons term, you could 
use Communists, but communism isn't a field of activity, in my opinion.

 

Similarly, I have seen authority records for corporate bodies where people want 
to make very narrow attributes.  To use a made-up example, if there were a 
heading "National Association of Skydivers. Board of Directors", some would add 
a 372 for "National Association of Skydivers-Administration."  I would question 
whether such a subordinate body needs any such field, but if so, I think it 
should be "Skydiving", which would have been on the parent record.  Does anyone 
think it makes sense to use a corporate body name as a field of activity?

 

------------------------------------------

John Hostage 

Senior Continuing Resources Cataloger //

Harvard Library--Information and Technical Services //

Langdell Hall 194 //

Cambridge, MA 02138 

host...@law.harvard.edu 

+(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice) 

+(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax)

 

From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Santos Muñoz, Ricardo
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 05:07


To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] The meaning of 372 Field of Activity

 

Hello again. 

 

I'm wrangling with some of the 3xx fields for authority records, in order to 
produce some policy for using some of them in a coherent and fruitful way. I'm 
facing some problems, and neither the MARC field itself, nor RDA instructions, 
nor the use I've seen out there gives me a clear view. 

 

The main bump in the road is field 372. Let's say I'm working on Joseph Stalin. 
I'd like record and retrieve him as a politician (374), as a member of 
Communist Party of the Soviet Union (373), but I'd like to relate him with 
communism. So, recording "Communism" in 372 seems perfect for that purpose. But 
I would also record Comunism in 372 for a scholar historian on communism. 

 

Summing up, if I record 372 Punk-rock, Am I expressing that the guy is a 
musician (374), specialized in doing punk-rock music, or Am I indicating that 
he/she is a music critic (374), expert on punk-rock music? 

 

Thanks in advance for opinions and experiencies.

 

Ricardo Santos Muñoz

Depto. de Proceso Técnico

Biblioteca Nacional de España

Tfno.: 915 807 735

 

 


**************************************************************************
Experience the British Library online at http://www.bl.uk/
 
The British Library’s latest Annual Report and Accounts : 
http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html
 
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

Reply via email to