CompDraft RDA Sect.3

From CCDA
Revision as of 17:25, 7 January 2009 by Admin (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Always log in before editing a section.

Click here to get to the top level RDA Complete Draft outline page in the wiki



General comments on Section 3

[General comments on chapter 8] The general guidelines of Chapter 8 are intended for establishing personal and corporate name headings in bibliographic records and variant names and cross-references in authority records. This guiding principle needs to be clearly articulated at the very beginning of the chapter so that people will not wonder whether Chapter 8 applies to bibliographic records or to authority records. SHI DENG for CEAL (Entered by Myers 1/7/09)

Libraries without NACO trainings may not necessarily recognize that the provisions 8.8-8.13 apply to authority records, not to bibliographic records. The instructions for bibliographic and authority records should be laid out in separate sections, because it is not always possible or appropriate to supply in bibliographic records the data prescribed in 8.8-8.13 that are only provided in authority records. Lump together the provisions for bibliographic and authority records may cause confusion. SHI DENG for CEAL (Entered by Myers 1/7/09)

Chapter 8. General guidelines on recording attributes of persons, families, and corporate bodies

8.0 Scope

8.1 Terminology

8.1.2 Should the definition of corporate body include mention of conference as a type of corporate body? Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008

8.2 Functional objectives and principles

8.3 Core elements

Can anyone else figure out what the RDA reference is supposed to be at the next to last paragraph of this rule concerning undifferentiated name? 8.1.3 does not seem to include any reference to undifferentiated names. I know that many of these references are incorrect, and usually I can figure them out. This one is not as obvious. Winzer 12/11/08

8.3 "If none of the other identifying attributes listed above can be readily ascertained, designate the name as an undifferentiated name (see 8.1.3)": Rule 8.1.3 is not at all related to undifferentiated names. "8.1.3" should instead read: 8.11 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08 Agreed, and this is the answer to Kathy's question. MYERS 12/21/2008

8.4 Language and script

8.4 Alternative: It would be thought this instruction applies to either a preferred name, variant name and names appearing in the other elements. Yet, for the preferred name, there's no substitute or addition, but one preferred name and others become variant names. This alternative instruction seems misleading. Maybe we could say "Record a transliterated form of the name instead. If possible, add the original script form as a variant", or something along the line. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

8.5 General guidelines on recording names

Rule 8.5.1 ERROR: bad cross reference, 8.5.3 should be 8.5.2 MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 8.5.6 Contrast this with 1.7.6. The different treatments between the two cases here, while possibly justified by historical precedent, are difficult to reconcile with claims that the rules are “principled.” It would have been better to state a general rule in line with 1.7.6, but render the treatment of personal and family names as an exception. MYERS 12/21/2008

8.6 Preferred access points representing persons, families, and corporate bodies

8.7 Variant access points representing persons, families, and corporate bodies

8.8 Scope of usage

[EXAMPLES] 8.8.1.3 It would be helpful to have an example for a corporate body. Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008

8.9 Date of usage

Rule 8.9 A reference to Appendix H is needed, or reference to an earlier rule referring to Appendix H? MYERS 12/21/2008

8.9.1.3 Couldn't the date of usage be recorded also for variant names associated with personal name changes? This part might read instead: "Record information about the date of usage of the name designated as the preferred name for the person, family, or corporate body and for variant names associated with personal name changes." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

8.10 Status of identification

8.11 Undifferentiated name indicator

8.12 Source consulted

8.13 Cataloguer’s note

8.13.1 Basic instructions on making cataloguer's notes

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Lack CJK examples to illustrate the instruction.
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggested examples to be added:
  Prefers that Chinese form of name be used in bib. records for items in Chinese and that Lee, James 
  Z. be used as heading in records for items in English. (from Lee, James Z., 1952- LCCN n    
  96080631)
  For works of this author entered under other names, search also under Ye, Shan or Wang, C.H. 
  (Ching-hsien), 1940- ) (from Yang, Mu, 1940- LCCN n  81069280)
  Works by this author are entered under the name used in the item. For a listing of other names 
  used by this author, search also under  Yang, Mu, 1940-  (from Ye, Shan  LCCN n  81071768)
  Works by this author are entered under the name used in the item. For a listing of other names 
  used by this author, search also under  Yang, Mu, 1940- (from Wang, C.H. (Ching-hsien), 1940-  
  LCCN n  98097575)
  Dōshisha Eigakkō, est. Nov. 1875 (from LCCN n 79095562)
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

8.13.1.1 Couldn't a cataloguer's note be made also on variant access points, such as: Non-Latin script reference(s) not evaluated? The provision might read instead: "A cataloguer's note is an annotation that might be helpful to those using or revising the preferred or variant access point(s), or creating a preferred access point for a related person, family, or corporate body." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

8.13.1.3 Couldn't a cataloguer's note be made also on variant access points, such as: Non-Latin script reference(s) not evaluated? The provision might read instead: "Make any other notes that might be helpful to a cataloguer using or revising the preferred or variant access point(s), or creating a preferred access point for a related person, family, or corporate body." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08


Chapter 9. Identifying persons

9.0 Purpose and scope

The rules are significantly improved over the draft previously submitted. There is still some muddling of the functions of recording elements for a group 2 entity record and selecting and assigning those elements in the creation of an access point for bibliographic records. Having said that, I’m not certain I could offer large scale improvements on what has been provided in the draft. MYERS 12/21/2008

9.0, footnote 1 "Person, as used in this chapter, refers to a human or non-human individual or to an identity established by an individual (either alone or in collaboration with one or more other individuals).": According to "Issues deferred until after the first release of RDA", the concept of a non-human person will be elucidated later. However, it is clear from the examples in RDA that fictitious non-human characters (Dr. Snoopy, Miss Piggy) should not be considered non-human individuals. Lemony Snicket, however, while a fictitious character, is also an identity established by a human individual. Add clarification: Person, as used in this chapter, refers to a human or non-human individual ... Person does not refer to fictitious non-human characters. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

9.1 General guidelines on identifying persons

Rule 9.1.1 vs. 9.2.1.2, 9.3.1.2, etc. Redundant MYERS 12/21/2008

9.2 Name of the person

9.2.2 Preferred name for the person

9.2.2.2, a) Is there anywhere in RDA that elevates a creatorial association over one that is subject? Is that inherently desirable or undesirable? For example, Mrs. H.H.A. Beach chose to identify herself that way, but most writers of biography call her "Amy Beach." -- Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.2.2.5.2 It's not clear which specific rule(s) under 9.2 it is referring to. Please clarify. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.2.5.2 2nd Exception Why is the rule specific to instances of “given name recorded as the first element”? What principle drives the differentiation of these instances from surnames as the first element? MYERS 12/21/2008


9.2.2.5.3 EDITORIAL: Greek typography does not always supply rough-breathing marks, but to follow 8.5.4 and the Homer/Όμηρος example below, one should be supplied over the o in "o Μέγας." Supply rough-breathing mark over the omicron in "ο Μέγας." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.2.5.3 b) The loss of the previous rule structure here is particularly infelicitous and confusing (especially as one moves to para. 4-7). The text is no longer sufficiently distinguished by rule numbers and headers from the rules for the preferred form, thereby leading to the appearance of conflicting rules and examples. MYERS 12/21/2008

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Names Written in a Non-Preferred Script [2nd example on p. 12, and on p. 14]
  Names Written in a Non-Preferred Script [2nd example]
  For Example:
  Li An
  Name appears in original script as:李安 
  [2nd example] For Example:
  Ang Lee
  Name appears in original script as: 李安
  p. 12 on “Li, An” under instruction of recording as preferred & p. 14 on “Ang 
  Lee” under recording as variant 
  Should these two be swapped? since these two examples illustrates the opposite of 
  the already established authority heading, and from North American catalogers’ 
  view, it would be confusing. Or is it matter since RDA intended to be used 
  internationally, in this case?
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to swap these two examples.
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

Rule 9.2.2.5.3 b) Examples ERROR: In the first example bubble, the second example (Jamal ‘Adb al-Nasir) has been merged into the descriptive text for the first example (Li An) MYERS 12/21/2008

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Names Written in a Non-Preferred Script [4th example on p. 12, and on 1st example 
  on p. 15]
  [4th example (Korean)on p. 12]  
  For Example:
  Yi Sŭng-man
  Name appears in original script as:李承晚
  [1st example on p. 15]
  For Example:
  Syngman Rhee
  Name appears in original script as: 李承晚
  Yi Sung-man is listed in p. 15 following ‘an alternative instruction’ because he 
  is the first president of South Korea.  His name is established in English, well-
  accepted form in USA as a Syngman Rhee.  Yi Sung-man is currently a cross
  reference of Syngman Rhee.  I think it’s better to replace Yi Sung-man example 
  with somebody else whose heading is a preferred Access Point Representing a 
  Person in this section.  Listing Yi Sung-man here is not wrong but it’s not ideal 
  either. 
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to replace 4th example on p. 12 with the following example:
  Cho Man-sik   
  Name appears in original script as: 조만식
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee 
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu
  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Names Written in a Non-Preferred Script [Last example on p. 12]
  For Example:
  A.N. Scriabin
  Name appears in original script as: А.Н. Skri͡abin
  There is the following typo in the example A.N. Scriabin (the example is only 
  partially in Cyrillic):
  This same error is repeated on p. 15.
  Solution and Reason:
  It should be: 
  Name appears in original script as А.Н.  
  Скрябин
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

9.2.2.8 Individuals with More Than One Identity

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  P. 18-21: Lack CJK examples.
  Solution and Reason
  Suggest to add Chinese examples using 衛斯理 (Wei Sili), 
  原振俠(Yuan Zhenxia) and 倪匡 (Ni Kuang)
  For Example
  倪匡[Ni Kuang]
  Real name for most of his works
  For Example
  衛斯理[Wei Sili]
  Pseudonym used by倪匡in one of his series
  For Example
  原振俠 [Yuan Zhenxia]
  Pseudonym used by倪匡in one of his series
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu
  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples: Exception on p. 22-23
  There are no non-Roman examples (and in the linked 9.2.3.4 under Exception 
  (p. 22) there are none). Should there be? a good example under the "Exception" 
  (and 9.2.3.4) would be 魯迅 (周树人)
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to add to the group of examples under Exception instruction
  Lu Xun 
  not Zhou Shuren 
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

9.2.2.8, exception--how important is author's choice here? What would be done for a collection of George Orwell legal documents on which he had to use his real name? What if they were published under the Orwell name? Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08


Rule 9.2.2.9 paragraph “Omit terms of address...” Examples are improperly and redundantly placed here. The rule is directional and the examples under the referent rules are adequate. MYERS 12/21/2008

Agree. Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.2.2.9.4 Is the instruction here clear enough, or the path to it sufficient, to make sure that the cataloger uses “the husband’s name” in the form referring to the woman, rather than the form referring to him? (e.g. Beach, H.H.A., Mrs.; but Beach, Henry Harris Aubrey) -- Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.2.2.10 There is no 9.2.1.9, to which a reference is made at 9.2.2.10, found in the full draft. This blind reference calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.2.10.1 para. 2 Redundant with rule 9.2.2.10 para 2. MYERS 12/21/2008

9.2.2.10.1—Lloyd George example: the explanation does not seem sufficient. Some sort of Welsh thing? His mother’s name was Lloyd. Or am I missing something? Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.2.2.11 There is no 9.2.1.9, to which a reference is made at 9.2.2.11, found in the full draft. This blind reference calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

9.2.2.12 There is no 9.2.1.9, to which a reference is made at 9.2.2.12, found in the full draft. This blind reference calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

9.2.2.13 It carries a header for surnames, while the latter part of para. 2 is for cases where there is no surname. If there is no surname, record as the first element the part of the name that is used to identify the person in resources or in reference sources (e.g., name of the house or dynasty, territorial title). might read instead: "If there is no surname, see 9.2.2.20." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.2.14 “Proper name in a title of nobility” is not defined here or in glossary, requiring reference to the examples to determine inductively. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 9.2.2.14 b) ERROR?: The footnote number is better located nearly anywhere in this segment than where it presently is located, preferably however at the end. MYERS 12/21/2008

9.2.2.21 Examples ERROR: Many of the examples in the third and 4th “bubbles” are incorrectly parsed when they should appear in the various other “bubbles” illustrating specific clauses of the rule. Further, the “bubbles” should be sequenced to match the sequence of those clauses. 1st bubble illustrate “initials, letters, numerals in direct order”: H. D., Q. E. D., IA. Sh., A. de. D. Th. D., S. A., Gr. Os., A. B. C. D. E., A G (F) 61648, 3-2, 20/1631, 3PM, FF8282 *Ball, 50 Cent, DJ Q, DJ 20/20. 2nd bubble illustrate “include typographic devices as part of multi-letter abbreviations”: A. B—z, A—r, Z—h. 3rd bubble illustrate “omit when they follow single letter initials”: J. W. 4th bubble illustrate “include words or phrases”: H., abbé, D. S., Master. (Is the example A! A! A! formulated according to the rule?) MYERS 12/21/2008

9.2.3.3 PRIORITY: Even after adding "R" at the beginning of this part, this provision is still incomplete, as written. This part calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.3.3 ERROR: 2nd para lacks initial ‘R’ ERROR: 3rd para has closed up space between “or” and “found” MYERS 12/21/2008

9.2.3.5 The section header carries "Secular Name" (for recording as variant name), while the provision is for an opposite case, which does not match examples. This section should instead read: "Secular Name / If the name chosen as the preferred name for a person is the name used in religion, record the person's secular name as a variant name. / Bojaxhiu, Agnes Gonxha ... - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.2.3.5 ERROR: The text here repeats that of 9.2.3.6, when it should have the words “secular” and “religious” transposed. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 9.2.3.9 Examples ERROR: Numerous alternative forms in 1st and 2nd “bubbles” have been transposed below their explanatory text instead of grouping above it (Dominic, Hemingway, Benedict under language form; Hemingway under script) MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 9.2.3.10 Examples

No example illustrates perhaps the most common type of difference in fullness--the presence vs. absence of a middle name or initial. This would mimic current NACO practice limiting references where differences do not affect the "primary elements of the name" (from an LCRI in Chp. 26). Is this deliberate? Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.3 Date associated with the person

Rule 9.3.1.3 Why reference to appendix H as a footnote rather than text of the rule? Also, the rules would benefit by amplifying this footnote to explicitly identify appendix H as the source for guidance on the usage of B.C. and A.D. (or their substitutes). MYERS 12/21/2008

9.3.2.3 Provision for recording month and day when name is identical to that of another smacks of access-point creation. Is that where we are here? Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

9.3.4.1 Section 9.3.4 is for the period of activity. Therefore, the provision with regard to the date of death is irrelevant at 9.3.4.1. Under 9.3.4.1, delete: "Date of death may also include the month and day of the person's death." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

9.4 Title of the person

9.5 Fuller form of name

9.6 Other designation associated with the person

Rule 9.6.1.4 Although the construction of the access point for popes, emperors, empresses, kings, or queens does not allow the use of Saint, that should not obviate the recording of sainthood for such persons. MYERS 12/21/2008

9.7 Gender

9.8 Place of birth

9.8.1.3 Recording place of birth

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Although required to enter locations as prescribed in chapter 16, they are not entered as access 
  points.
  Solution and Reason:
  Although locations for birth, death, and residence are required to be entered as per the 
  instructions in chapter 16 of RDA, they are entered as text rather than being related using 
  identifiers. Locations entered using a controlled vocabulary should be controlled (i.e., related 
  using an identifier or the preferred name). This should be addressed in Appendix E as well, with 
  placeholders entered for revised MARC data fields. The need to treat descriptive information as   
  separate access points appears throughout RDA chapters 9, 10, and 11 (e.g., profession or 
  occupation, gender, affiliation, etc.), and is not reflected in the appendix E mapping.
  Name: Cory Nimer
  Institutional Affiliation: Brigham Young University
  Email: cory_nimer@byu.edu

9.9 Place of death

9.10 Country associated with the person

9.11 Place of residence

9.12 Address of the person

9.13 Affiliation

9.14 Language of the person

9.15 Field of activity of the person

Rule 9.15 vs. 9.16 Are these rules and concepts sufficiently distinct to warrant separate but duplicated rules? MYERS 12/21/2008

9.16 Profession or occupation

9.17 Biographical information

9.18 Identifier for the person

9.19 Constructing access points to represent persons

9.19.1.1 What follows in .2 is to add titles, .3 to add dates, and .4 to add fuller forms of name. This is not the right order. Probably, it is the order of preference, but the wording is a bit confusing. Please rephrase or clarify. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 9.19.1.5 Should the rule include the addition of the date(s) of activity as well as the term? MYERS 12/21/2008

9.19.1.5 Is “17th century,” strictly speaking, a term or is it a date? Not according to 9.3.4. Why would “flourished” not be used with centuries? -- Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

Rule 9.19.1.6 vs. 9.19.1.7 Why are the recording rules in the sequence Field of Activity/Profession or Occupation, but the addition rules in the sequence Profession or Occupation/Field of Activity – they should be consistent, or better yet, as noted previously, combined. If not combined then the final cross reference under 9.19.1.6 is incorrect and should be 9.16 MYERS 12/21/2008


9.19.1.6 References should not be made back to the rule itself. This provision should instead read: If none of the elements specified under 9.19.1.3 –9.19.1.5 is available ... - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

9.19.2.1 Examples for Kings and Emperors as Saints, how are these variants to be supported if the Sainthood was not recorded, per 9.6.1.4? MYERS 12/21/2008

9.19.2.1--Am I reading right that additions to variants are not required to resolve conflicts? Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08


Chapter 10. Identifying families

10.0 Purpose and scope

10.1 General guidelines on identifying families

10.2 Name of the family

10.2.2.5 Provision 9.2.1.1 is not regarding fullness, 9.2.1.2 not regarding language, 9.2.1.3 not regarding script. In addition, there is no 9.2.1.4, to which a reference is made at 10.2.2.5, found in the full draft. Those inappropriate references and a blind reference call for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

10.2.3 Variant name for the family

10.2.3.4 Alternative linguistic form of name

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under under Alternative Linguistic Form of Name: 
  Different Script [Insert script]
  Chinese transliterated form recorded as preferred name: Li
  Solution and Reason:
  Supply scripts
  Different Script
  李[or 黎, or 厉 etc. ??]
  Chinese transliterated form recorded as preferred name: Li
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

10.2.3.5 Provision at 10.6 is not related to hereditary titles. "10.6" should instead read: 10.7 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 10.2.3.5 vs. 10.7.1.3 These two rules give diametrically opposed instructions regarding the same situation. MYERS 12/21/2008

10.3 Type of family

10.4 Date associated with the family

10.5 Place associated with the family

10.6 Prominent member of the family

10.7 Hereditary title

Rule 10.7.1.3 vs. 10.2.3.5 These two rules give diametrically opposed instructions regarding the same situation. MYERS 12/21/2008

10.8 Family history

10.9 Identifier for the family

10.10 Constructing access points to represent families

Chapter 11. Identifying corporate bodies

11.0 Purpose and scope

11.1 General guidelines on identifying corporate bodies

11.2 Name of the corporate body

11.2.2 Preferred name for the corporate body

11.2.2.3 Where is an instruction to omit initial articles? Not in 8.5; e.g. “The Ohio State University”. Is there a really general instruction someplace? 11.2.2.8 says to, but only for the preferred form. Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

11.2.2.5.2 More than one language form of the name

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Lack CJK and Mongolian examples to illustrate the instruction.
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to add an example after the 1st example on p. 7
  For Example:
  Comité français de la danse 
  not French Committee of the Dance
  Mongolyn Burkhany Shashny Urlakhuĭ Ukhaany Dėėd Surguulʹ
  (romanization of Монголын   
  Бурханы Шашны 
  Урлахуй Ухааны 
  Дээд Сургууль)
  not Mongolian Institute of Buddhist Art
  not Monggol Pulgyo Misul Taehak
  not 몽골불교미술대학
  not 몽골佛敎美術大學
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

'Proposal from Adam Schiff, arising from his work on the examples group, and placed in the ALA response at the request of the JSC Chair'

  RDA instruction 19.2.1.1 f) ii) states that creators include corporate bodies 
  responsible for decrees of a head of state, chief executive, or ruling executive 
  body.  There is an example of a ruling executive body as a creator in instruction 
  19.2.1.3 on page 23 of the current chapter 19 draft:  
    Peru. Junta Militar de Gobierno (1948-1956).
  
  While there are instructions in chapter 11 for formulating access points for 
  heads of state and chief executive (11.2.2.19 Type 9 and 11.2.2.21), there are no 
  instructions for how to formulate the access point for a ruling executive body.  
  This is an omission carried over from AACR2 that needs to be rectified.
  
  RDA should have instructions on how to record the name of a ruling executive 
  body.  Below is the proposed text for these instructions.
  
  1)  In 11.2.2.19 Government Bodies Recorded Subordinately, add an additional type 
  (probably should go between current types 5 and 6):
  
  TYPE X. A ruling executive body (see also 11.2.2.22).
  
     Argentina. Junta Militar
     Gambia. Armed Forces Provisional Ruling Council
     Honduras. Junta Militar de Gobierno
     Nigeria. Supreme Military Council
     Peru. Gobierno Revolucionario de las Fuerzas Armadas
     Thailand. Khana Patiwat
  
  2)  Add a new instruction between the current 11.2.2.21 Government Officials and 
  11.2.2.22 Legislative Bodies and renumber all subsequent instructions.
  
  11.2.2.22  Ruling Executive Bodies
  
  Record the name of a ruling executive body (e.g., a military junta) as a 
  subdivision of the preferred access point for the jurisdiction over which it 
  rules.
  
     Argentina. Junta Militar
     El Salvador. Junta Revolucionaria de Gobierno
     Ghana. Armed Forces Revolutionary Council
     Nicaragua. Junta de Gobierno de Reconstrucción Nacional
     Sierra Leone. National Provisional Ruling Council
     Somalia. Golaha Sare ee Kacaanka
     Thailand. Khana Patiwat
     Venezuela. Junta Militar de Gobierno
  
  If necessary for identification, add, in parentheses, the inclusive years of rule 
  of the body. 
  
    Chile. Junta de Gobierno (1813)
    Chile. Junta de Gobierno (1973-1990)

MYERS for SCHIFF, 12/9/2008

I am not sure that a separate TYPE is needed for these. Could they not be included in TYPE 9 A head of state or head of government? as: TYPE 9. A head of state, head of government, or other ruling executive body. Adding the instruction makes sense, if they are that different from Heads of government or heads of state. It seems to me that the instruction should follow the 11.2.2.21.2 Heads of Government rules and come before 11.2.2.21.3, which talks about international intergovernmental bodies. Winzer 12/11/08


11.2.2.4 "In applying this general guideline, apply the instructions given under 11.2.1.7–11.2.1.12": There is no 11.2.1.7–11.2.1.12, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.4, found in the full draft. "11.2.1.7–11.2.1.12" should instead read: 11.2.2.7–11.2.2.12

For instructions on recording the names of subordinate and related bodies, see 11.2.1.13–11.2.1.17., There is no 11.2.1.13–11.2.1.17, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.4, found in the full draft. "11.2.1.13–11.2.1.17" should instead read: 11.2.2.13–11.2.2.17

For instructions on recording the names of government bodies, see 11.2.1.18–11.2.1.27., There is no 11.2.1.18–11.2.1.27, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.4, found in the full draft. "11.2.1.18–11.2.1.27" should instead read: 11.2.2.18–11.2.2.27 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.5.4 Exception for Religious Orders Example Ordo Templi Orientis: It is not clear why the option c) is applied here. Is it because the multitude of English language names obviate options a) and b)? An explanation that “no name in the language preferred by the agency predominates”. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.5.4 Exception for Local Churches, etc. ERROR: Caption should be italicized not bolded. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.7 Isn’t this a needless restatement of 8.5.6? MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.7 ERROR: cross reference in final sentence should be changed from 8.5.5. to 8.5.6. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.8 Examples ERROR: the layout after Library Association has been lost: spacing between examples has closed and the Danske Praesteforening example has been run onto the end of the The Library Association example. MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.10 Terms indicating incorporation and certain other terms

EXAMPLE: "Automobiltechnische Gesellschaft" is repeated, once as correct recording of the corporate body name and then again as incorrect recording. This example should instead read: Automobiltechnische Gesellschaft, not Automobiltechnische Gesellschaft e.V. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.10 Examples ERROR: The “right” and “wrong” forms in the second bubble are the same "Automobiltechnische Gesellschaft". Presumably, the “wrong” form has lost a term of incorporation in the transfer to pdf format. MYERS 12/21/2008


  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  [1st group examples on p.20]
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to add a Korean example to the 1st group examples on p. 20:
  For Example:
  ...
  Kʻoria Pʻikchʻyŏsŭ (Chu)   
  not (Chu)  Kʻoria Pʻikchʻyŏsŭ
  [‘(Chu)’ here means Ltd.]
  Samsŏng Chŏnja (LCCN n  85022222)
  not Samsŏng Chŏnja Chusik Hoesa
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu
  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under the following instruction on p. 20: 
  Omit an initial word or phrase in an oriental language indicating the private character of a 
  corporate body (e.g., Shiritsu, Si li), unless the word or phrase is an integral part of the name.
  For Example:
  Dong hai da xue
  not Si li Dong hai da xue
  but
  Shiritsu Daigaku Toshokan Kyōkai
  need add other CJL examples to illustrate the instruction.
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to add Japanse and Korean examples  
  For Example:
  Dong hai da xue
  not Si li Dong hai da xue
  Kōchi Gakugei Kōtō Gakkō (LCCN nr 93026096) 
  not Shiritsu Kōchi Gakugei Kōtō Gakkō 
  Hakusai Byōin (LCCN n 2004123900)   
  not Shiritsu Hakusai Byōin
  Taehan Pulgyo Chinhŭngwŏn
  not Chaedan Pŏbin Taehan Pulgyo Chinhŭngwŏn (OCLC# 39256723)
  but  Shiritsu Daigaku Toshokan Kyōkai
  but Sarip Hakkyo Kyowŏn Yŏnʼgŭm Kwalli Kongdan (Korea)
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

11.2.2.12 Transliteration

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under Transliteration on p. 22
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggestion: add Korean entry as the 4th example just to show Korean alphabet, Hangul before the 
  instruction “alternative” paragraph on p. 22.
  For Example:
  Hanʼgukhak Chungang Yŏnʼguwŏn
  Name appears in original script as:  한국학 중앙  
  연구원 
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

11.2.2.13 Exceptions ERROR: References are incomplete with rule numbers for further consultation missing. This part should instead read: "Exceptions / For instructions on recording the names of subordinate government bodies, see 11.2.2.19-11.2.2.27." "For instructions on recording the names of subordinate religious bodies, see 11.2.2.30-11.2.2.31." - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.13 Examples The Harvard Law School example is not entered subordinately because it lacks the “University” component of Harvard University? MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.13, Examples: A case where it might not be considered good form to use the AACR2 technique of providing the xref from the indirect form, but where the example seems silly if information on the parent body is not available. Links out to that (or to a document that listed them all with their respective parent bodies) would seem to make sense. Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

Rule 11.2.2.14 Footnote 4 Although the footnote format is transferred intact from AACR2, ought it to be part of the rule? Further, since I confess overlooking this footnote, is there some illustration of how one distinguishes the two conditions referenced in the note? MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.14 Type 2 Examples, 3rd bubble The “But” counter examples look like they should be Type 1 (in the 1st instance) and Type 6 (in the remainder) subordinate bodies. Either the rules need to be better presented so that I understand my error, or the examples need to be moved to the other Types. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.15 Examples Are three ALA examples required/appropriate? MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.16 There is no 11.2.0, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.16, found in the full draft. This blind reference calls for adjustment. Also provision at 11.2.3, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.16 is with regard to variant name for the corporate body and thus irrelevant. Referred provision number "11.2.3" calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

11.2.2.18 There is no 11.2.1.4, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.18, found in the full draft. This blind reference calls for adjustment. And Exception: Referred provision number range "11.2.3-11.2.2.16" is lopsided. Referred provision number range "11.2.3-11.2.2.16" should instead read: 11.2.2.3-11.2.2.16 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.19 Types 1-4 generally duplicate the general rule. Is there some way to refer back rather than re-iterating the text? MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.19, Type 3 example EDITORIAL & PRIORITY: "Niger" belongs to the example immediately below, "Niger. Commissariat général au développement. Centre de documentation." Move text "Niger" to succeeding example. (This may be the kind of copy-editing issue that need not be commented on, but it took TF members a few minutes to figure it out, so it was thought something should be said.) - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

11.2.2.21.2 Head of governments

Rule 11.2.2.21 What principle guides the selection of language for recording various titles and bodies? It seems entirely arbitrary. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.21.1/.2/.3/.4 Could not these nearly identical rules be consolidated to deal with Executives generally? MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.21.2 ERROR: The condition "if the official language identified is a specific incumbent of the office" is not readily understandable, since a "language" may not conceivably be an "incumbent" of the office. This part should instead read: "If the official [DELETE "language"] identified is a specific incumbent of the office, ... " - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08 Actually, the replacement text should be "If the official being identified is a specific incumbent ..." so as to match the corresponding paragraph in 11.2.2.21.1 MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.21.3 ERROR: The opening of the 2nd paragraph, “If the access point is for a specific incumbent” duplicates that of the 4th paragraph which is where the similar rules have addressed access points. The text of the 2nd paragraph should parallel 11.2.2.21.1 para. 2 “If the official being identified is a specific incumbent ...” MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.21.4 ERROR: The 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph needs to start a new paragraph. MYERS 12/21/2008


  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples on Heads of Governments 2nd group of examples on p. 45:
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggestion: add a Korean example
  Korea (South). Kungmu Chʻongnisil 
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

11.2.2.21.5 There is no 11.2.7.2–11.2.7.5, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.21.5, found in the full draft. Referred provision number range "11.2.7.2–11.2.7.5" should instead read: 11.2.2.21.1-11.2.2.21.4 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.22 Example: An English language example that does not use “Legislature” could be helpful: Massachusetts. General Court MYERS 12/21/2008

Rule 11.2.2.23.3 Why a special case for U.S. subcommittees? What principle drives this exception? Why not state explicitly as an exception? MYERS 12/21/2008


11.2.2.25.1 Armed forces at the national level

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  1st group of examples on p. 50: ll five examples from the bottom have a period at the end.  Does 
  it necessary unless it means something together with the numbers. [inconsistent with the rest of 
  examples]
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggestion: Remove period at the end of these five examples.
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu
  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples on Armed forces on p. 58: Suggestion: If CJK also follows this rule without   
  exception, shall we add a CJK example?  There is a little pecuriarity so it’s better to show an 
  example.  
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggestion: Add a Korean example:
  Korea (South). Yukkun.  Sadan, Che 1. Yŏndae, 11
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

11.2.2.26 Embassies, consulates, etc.

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under Embassies, Consulates, etc., 2nd group examples on 
  p. 61.
  Solution and Reason
  Suggestion: add a Korean example in the 2nd group since there is no CJK example
  Korea (South).  Taesagwan (U.S.) 
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

Rule 11.2.2.26 Examples 2nd Bubble, the 2nd entry is a little problematic due to 16.2.2.9. A reference should be made to 16.2.2.9 in the rule. MYERS 12/21/2008

Rules 11.2.2.29.1/.2 ERROR: The first cross reference in each rule is not completed – 6.X.X MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.29.2 There is no 9.2.12, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.29.2, found in the full draft. Referred provision number "9.2.12" should instead read: 9.2.2.18 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.2.29.2 The text is a direct parallel for the other officials covered under 11.2.2.29.1. Could not the rules be combined and perhaps an example from one of the Eastern Orthodox Churches be added? MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.2.30 There is neither 11.2.113 nor 11.2.1.1.5.2, to which a reference is made at 11.2.2.30, found in this full draft. Each of these two blind references calls for adjustment. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

[EDITORIAL] 11.2.2.30 A better heading would be "Subordinate Religious Bodies" Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008

11.2.3.3 PRIORITY: The concept of multiple identities for corporate bodies (as opposed to persons) is new to RDA (not present in AACR2) and is difficult to understand. An explanation or an example of: "corporate bodies that have established two or more identities" would be of high utility. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Strongly agree. Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08 Strongly agree as well. – Robare, 12/22/08

11.2.3.4, middle of p. 73. It is somewhat limiting that this paragraph talks about how abbreviations are accessed differently, when we are working in many "catalogs." Isn't it more important for the rule to take into account sharing of data? Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008

11.2.3.5, bottom of p. 74. Same comment as for 11.2.3.4 Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008

11.2.3.6 Alternative linguistic form of name

Rule 11.2.3.6, para. 2 Why not, “If the name recorded as the preferred names has a number expressed as a numeral in either the beginning or in any position such that it affects access, and in the catalogue...”? It takes 3 readings to figure out what this rule is trying to say in the present formulation. MYERS 12/21/2008

The first line of this particular example "27 Knygos ..." does not illustrate the provision. From this particular example, the first line: "27 Knygos ..." should be deleted. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.2.3.6, para. 2 The 2nd bubble of the Examples, the example 27 Knygos does not illustrate the rule as written. 27 is not a “form with the number expressed as a word”; the example should provide the Russian word equivalent for 27. The arabic numeral form is an important variant however, so a rule addressing variant forms under Arabic numerals when the number is expressed as a non-Arabic numeral needs to be created. MYERS 12/21/2008


  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under Alternative Linguistic Form of Name on p. 76.
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggestion: add a Korean example under 1st group of examples showing different
  language form?
  Korea (South). Embassy (U.S.)
  Korea language from recorded in preferred name: Korea (South). Taesagwan (U.S.)
  Suggestion: add a Korean transliterated form for United Nations under 3rd example 
  of the 1st group
  Kukche Yŏnhap
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

Rule 11.2.3.6, para. 3 Why not, “If the name recorded as the preferred names has a number expressed as a word in either the beginning or in any position such that it affects access, and in the catalogue...”? As in para. 2, it takes 3 readings to figure out what this rule is trying to say in the present formulation, and takes close reading to figure out how they are different. MYERS 12/21/2008

11.2.3.6, middle of p. 78 and middle of p. 79. Same comment as for 11.2.3.4. Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008


11.2.3.7.1 EXAMPLE "United States. Dept. of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. National Economy and History Branch. Agricultural and Rural History Section ": It is not readily understandable as to why, according to the RDA (as opposed to LCRI) provisions, "Dept." should be abbreviated in this example. An explanation as to why "Dept." is abbreviated in this RDA (as opposed to LCRI) example would be of high utility. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

The above example is noted and will be fixed by the Examples chair. Winzer 12/16/08

11.3 Place associated with the corporate body

11.3.2.3 PRIORITY: This provision is, while in line with a provision at 11.12.1.8, contradictory to a separate but related provision at 11.5.1.3: "Record the name of an associated institution in the form and language recorded as the preferred name for the institution." Provision at 11.5 carries: "An associated institution is required for conferences, etc., if the institution's name is commonly associated with the name of the conference, etc." Seeming contradictory provisions at: 11.3.2.3 and 11.12.1.8 versus 11.5.1.3 should be resolved. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

Rule 11.3.3.3 Is it sufficient to refer back to the general rule in order to know to abbreviate per App. B? Or should that be included here? (Yes, I’m advocating redundancy here, but only in cross reference form.) MYERS 12/21/2008

11.4 Date associated with the corporate body

11.4. Initial paragraph. There are other qualifiers for corporate bodies than date, but this paragraph seems to place that limit on qualifiers for corporate bodies. Perhaps it should say "... a date may be used when needed to distinguish a corporate body ..." instead of "a date is required when needed ...." Fletcher for CONSER, Dec. 22, 2008


11.4.4 There seems to be no instruction about connecting dates of inception and termination with hyphens aside from that in the instruction for conferences. Is there a preferred-access-point instruction coming to do so? 11.12.1.5 doesn’t seem to contain it. Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

11.5 Associated institution

11.5.1.3 PRIORITY: This provision is contradictory to separate but related provisions at 11.3.2.3 and 11.12.1.8: "Record the name of the institution, etc., in the nominative case in the language and form in which it appears in the resource being described." Provision at 11.5 carries: "An associated institution is required for conferences, etc., if the institution's name is commonly associated with the name of the conference, etc." Seeming contradictory provisions at: 11.3.2.3 and 11.12.1.8 versus 11.5.1.3 should be resolved. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

11.6 Other designation associated with the corporate body

Rule 11.6 ERROR: Nearly duplicate text addressing “Core element” is provided. One appears to be earlier and lacks cross references. MYERS 12/21/2008

11.6.1 Are the things being recorded here explicitly destined for access points? The fact that the instruction here and in the one for the access point use the same lingo might suggest so, but should the needs of an access point limit or shape what is recorded here? And it’s possible that what would be recorded here might be more specific than what would be “suitable” for use in a qualifier (e.g. “Rap group” here, but “Musical group” in the access point) -- Scharff, MusLA 12/22/08

11.6.1.3 There is no 11.7.1.4–11.4.1.8, to which a reference is made at 11.6.1.3, found in the full draft. In addition, referred provision numbers range "11.7.1.4–11.4.1.8" is lopsided. Referred provision numbers range "11.7.1.4–11.4.1.8" should instead read: 11.6.1.4-11.6.1.7 - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

11.7 Language of the corporate body

11.8 Address of the corporate body

11.9 Field of activity of the corporate body

11.10 Corporate history

11.11 Identifier for the corporate body

11.12 Constructing access points to represent corporate bodies

Rule 11.12.1.1 By this point I’ve lost track of where the rule(s) addressing the inclusion of [space] [colon] [space] between the additions elements is found. I know I’ve seen it somewhere, but it would be helpful if such a reference or instruction were provided here. MYERS 12/21/2008

11.12.1.3 Place associated with a body

  Webform comment
  Statement of problem:
  Comments on examples under Place Associated with the Body, Optional Additionon 
  p. 118
  I have a great concern on this one.  These additions are used even though there 
  is no conflict.  I think one of the LC’s practice for CJK record is to add a 
  country qualifier (Korea) or (China) for many corporate bodies which are not 
  conflict with any other records at all and not containing the nature of national 
  characteristics either.   I once inquired to LC Korean Team why they provide 
  it.  Their unfinished response (They responded once and promised to confirm with 
  C and J but never did) was that CJK all use Chinese characters.  Therefore to 
  distinguish corp bodies in different countries and the companies between China 
  and Taiwan with the same name, LC consistently provided the qualifiers of country 
  names.  (Romanization field would be different among CJK but there is a concern
  for searching by script.  Or are we thinking of the time when we do away with the 
  Romanization system?)   Anyway, if this is the current practice in CJK community, 
  can we add some CJK examples containing the country qualifiers with a brief 
  explanation? 
  Solution and Reason:
  Add CJK examples with instruction that is retained or revised  from related LCRI 
  instruction:
  Hyŏndae Sahoe Yŏnʼguso (Korea) 
  Di zhi kuang chan bu di zhi li xue yan jiu suo (China) 
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu

11.12.1.8 PRIORITY: This provision is, while in line with a provision at 11.3.2.3, contradictory to a separate but related provision at 11.5.1.3: "Record the name of an associated institution in the form and language recorded as the preferred name for the institution." Provision at 11.5 carries: "An associated institution is required for conferences, etc., if the institution's name is commonly associated with the name of the conference, etc." Seeming contradictory provisions at: 11.3.2.3 and 11.12.1.8 versus 11.5.1.3 should be resolved. - Suzuki for CC:AAM TF on RDA, 12/11/08

11.12.2.1 General Guidelines on Constructing Variant Access Points to Represent Corporate Bodies

  Webform comment
  Comments on examples under General guidelines on p. 127-128:
  I noticed that all the variant entries are listed together before the preferred 
  heading quite consistently in the RDA, except this one.  Please see 16.2.3.6 and 
  other parts of RDA.
  Solution and Reason:
  Suggest to list all 7 variant forms together before the preferred form as the 
  following:
  For Example:
  Concours Eurovision de la chanson
  Eurovisie Songfestival
  Festival de la Canción de Eurovisión
  Festival Eurovisão da Canção
  Gran premio Eurovisione della canzone europea
  Grand Prix Eurovision de la chanson
  Söngvakeppni evrópskra sjónvarpsstöõva
  English language form recorded as preferred name: Eurovision Song Contest
  Name: Shi Deng
  Institutional Affiliation: CEAL CTP RDA Review Committee
  Email: sdeng@ucsd.edu
http://wikis.ala.org/ccda/index.php?title=CompDraft_RDA_Sect.3&oldid=7196
wikis.ala.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-42
69181
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:Z56QZHXR334IND7IYR22N7LSNJPYAI26
<urn:uuid:74e82300-9f76-48de-9840-94a30328a865>
2014-10-25T21:42:05Z
216.80.72.149
sha1:GYYIHLE6J62Y2XD7GT33GEILIITQTG4Z
<urn:uuid:ec1c4fd6-ac70-46d5-82c6-4438317465e4>
http://wikis.ala.org/ccda/index.php?title=CompDraft_RDA_Sect.3&oldid=7196
length
response
<urn:uuid:2bccbf76-3e0c-43d3-a64f-f21baf12811c>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-16-133-185.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-42
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for October 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf