Frequently Asked Questions on Establishing Corporate Names for NACO
- How much research is required when establishing a corporate body from a publication not issued by the body itself?
- Why can't a cross reference for a subordinate body be made through the parent body using the language form of the parent body found on the item when the established form of the parent body is in another language?
- For conference headings when can the date be used as part of the conference name?
- What is the LC/NACO policy regarding conference names when a conference name was originally established as a one-time event, but now it is clear that it is an ongoing conference? Is there an LCRI that provides guidance for this situation?
- Should "see also" references to corporate name forms that have not yet been used on a bibliographic record be coded with subfield $w nnna ("do not make")?
- What sources are recommended for determining the official language of a country?
- When are cross references through a jurisdiction made?
- Is it true that cross references through jurisdictions for religious institutions are no longer made?
- Does AACR2 24.4B "Additions to corporate names" apply to entities that have a "dot com" domain name extension as part of the name? And, does ....?
How much research is required when establishing a corporate body from a publication not issued by the body itself?
Unless there are other bodies with the same or similar names in the database against which a cataloger is searching or there is some other compelling reason (e.g., the official name of the body in question is likely to be in a language not represented in the item (AACR2 24.3A and the LCRI), LC and PCC practice is to treat the item being cataloged as a reference source. This means that a cataloger may choose a form found in the item being cataloged as the 1XX and/or choose a fuller form not found on the chief source when there are variant forms in the item without performing additional research.
This timesaving principle is based on AACR2 24.1A footnote 2, that states:"Reference sources ... includes books and articles written about a corporate body" and is further articulated in LCRI 24.2D. Although LCRI 24.2D is chiefly meant to be used when determining when to use an initialism vs. a full form the statement: "When a corporate name must be established for an item not issued by the corporate body treat the item being cataloged as a reference source" may be applied in all cases when establishing a corporate body.
Why can't a cross reference for a subordinate body be made through the parent body using the language form of the parent body found on the item when the established form of the parent body is in another language?
Example of an hypothetically established heading:
110 2 Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Sociales (Chile)
410 2 Center for Social Science Research (Chile)
Example of a heading being created for a subordinate unit of the above heading with usage found in the item in both Spanish and English:
110 2 Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Sociales (Chile). $b Departamento de Estadísticas
410 2 Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Sociales (Chile). $b Dept. of Statistics
Why couldn't the cross reference for the entire name be given as found on the item e.g.:
410 2 Center for Social Science Research (Chile). $b Dept. of Statistics
The LC policy for contributing name authority records to the Name Authority File is that an authorized form of each element in a corporate hierarchy must be established.
This principle is stated in DCM Z1 Introduction, Name authority records (NARs) section which states: "... make a name authority record for any personal or corporate .. heading ... whether it is actually first used as (or part of ) a main entry heading, a secondary entry .. or in certain cross references (e.g., hierarchy 4XX references, 5XX references)..."
This LC/PCC policy is a parameter for contribution of authority records to which all NACO participants agree. Once a heading is established it is a violation of this policy to make cross references from unauthorized forms of the elements in a hierarchical string. The foreign language or variant form of a parent body is included as a cross reference only on the NAR for the parent. Each additional subordinate unit must then use the established forms of the heading even though the subordinate unit variant can be given in the foreign language. LCRI 26.1 Forms of References statement: "... construct a reference in the same form in which it would be constructed if chosen as the heading ..." is interpreted by LC/PCC policy to reinforce the principle of not creating a cross-reference for a subordinate unit with unauthorized forms of the parent units.
In other words, if in the example above there were no Spanish equivalent for the subordinate body the heading would be established using the established Spanish form of the parent body (subfield $a) and the English form of the subordinate body (subfield $b) with 008/33 coded provisional. The same principle is applied to the formulation of the cross reference. The English form of the parent body is not authorized; therefore, it may not be used to formulate a cross-reference.
LCRI 24.7A allows a date to be used as part of a conference only when these are combined with an acronym or initialism. It is important to discern when a name is a true acronym or initialism. For example: Starch 2002, a name that appears on an item for a conference on compound starches is neither an acronym nor an initialism, nor may this be considered a conference name (Cf. LCRI 21.1B1). Even when all letters are uppercased, unless these represent a corporate body or are the initials for an event these may not be considered conference names regardless if there is a date as part of the name. Catalogers may be confusing the rule for Exhibitions, fairs, festivals, etc. (AACR2 24.8) that calls for keeping a year if it is an integral part of the name and does so without regard to whether or not the name is an acronym or initialism.
What is the LC/NACO policy regarding conference names when a conference name was originally established as a one-time event with the additions of date and place to the authority record, but now it is clear that it is an ongoing conference? Is there an LCRI that provides guidance for this situation?
This is an uncommon situation and generally it is LC/NACO practice to change the existing conference heading by deleting the qualifier, thus converting the heading into the form that is used to represent an ongoing conference in the NACO Authority File. This situation is not covered by an LCRI because the original heading is treated as an “error” and is simply “corrected” to reflect the change when evidence indicates that the conference is ongoing.
Should "see also" references to corporate name forms that have not yet been used on a bibliographic record be coded with subfield $w nnna ("do not make")? [cf. LCRI 26.3B-C]
110 2 $a Current Name
510 2 $w bnna $a Later Name, Unused On Bibliographic Records
110 2 $a Later Name, Unused On Bibliographic Records
410 2 $a LNUOB
510 2 $w a $a Current Name
No. Currently, LC's practice is to not to use the fourth position code "a" in control subfield $w to suppress references to established but unused forms of corporate headings that are not used in LC’s catalogs. Because the authority file is shared by so many libraries, it is recognized that other libraries might indeed have used the heading. Many systems manage to handle blind references without employing the subfield $w value. LCRI 26.3 B-C, section b), which calls for coding these references "do not make," is obsolete and will be corrected when the larger LCRI is revised.
When the rules (e.g., AACR2 24.3A, 24.3E) call for establishing a corporate name in the official language of the country, standard reference sources such as current editions of the Europa World Year Book or the Statesman's Year-Book as well as others should be consulted. For cases that can't be determined from standard reference sources, catalogers may consider contacting the embassy or consulate and asking.
Cross references through jurisdiction (i.e., 410 1) may be provided when the 110 is entered under jurisdiction and there is a need to provide references from variant forms, inverted forms (LCRI 26.3A3), and/or to show hierarchy (AACR2 24.19A). However, a cross reference through a jurisdiction for a corporate name entered in direct order (i.e.,110 2) is not required unless it is a government body entered independently (LCRI 26.3A7). There are other cases, such as when a joint task force or committee is subordinate to government agencies that are entered under jurisdictions, etc. (LCRI 24.15A) but generally cross references through jurisdiction are not routinely made except in the above cases.
Is it true that cross references through jurisdictions for local religious institutions are no longer made?
Yes, the practice for adding this cross reference for local religious institutions was discontinued in 1994 in favor of following AACR2 24.10B that requires adding a place name qualifier to the heading. Note: LCRI 24.10 B, note 2, asks catalogers to delete these cross references when found on NARs for churches if making other changes to the record.
Does AACR2 24.4B "Additions to corporate names" apply to entities that have a "dot com" domain name extension as part of the name? And, does AACR2 24.5C1 (regarding omission of terms indication incorporation, etc.) apply?
In other words, do the extensions "dot com," "dot gov," "dot org," etc., connote "corporateness" sufficient to render it unnecessary to add a qualifier or retain a term indicating incorporation?
Corporate body names that include a domain name extension "dot XXX" fall under AACR2 24.4B and should be qualified appropriately. At first glance it may seem that the presence of such domain name extensions connote corporateness; however, this is not always true. In fact, these names are very ambiguous and may represent:
- the name of a business enterprise, association, etc.
- the title of a Website or other resource, or
- an Internet address (e.g., a URL).
If it is determined that the name of the corporate body by which it is most commonly identified (Cf. 24.1A) includes the domain extension, apply AACR2 24.4B and its LCRI and add an appropriate qualifier, or retain a term of incorporation per 24.5C1.
If the string is actually a title of a Website, a qualifier may be needed in certain situations following LCRI 25.5B if needed to break a conflict.
If it is simply an Internet address (and not the name of a corporate body or title of a Website), then it is not a candidate for a name authority record.
Examples of corporate body name headings:
drkoop.com, Inc. (note the use of lowercase letters; this example will be added to rule A.2A1 in the 2005 update to AACR2 which has been modified to include guidance in cases of unusual capitalization in corporate names)
It is not necessary to change existing headings already established without the additional qualifier unless the heading must be changed for another reason.
Last Update: May 14, 2015 -- Being evaluated for RDA
|Send comments to: [email protected]|