Dear all
This sounds like something for the UK Archives Discovery Network (UKAD) to think about and as UKAD Secretary, I will happily put it on the Agenda for the next meeting of the Steering Committee in December. And if you're unaware of UKAD, its aims and objectives, then please visit the website @ http://www.ukad.org/, join the mailing list: [log in to unmask] come along to the Steering Committee meeting - it's open to all.
At our last meeting in August, we discussed where we might focus our efforts and potential projects or research we might jointly undertake, so perhaps the future of the NCA Rules in an 'aggregated' world might be one to consider? And if we did start to put together a programme of work around at least investigating the possibility of a revision of the Rules, we could share progress at the next UKAD Forum which we're currently planning for next March 2013.
More specifically, from The National Archives' perspective, it's clearly relevant to our ongoing work to shift the NRA, Archon and A2A on to the same platform as our new catalogue: Discovery; but any revision would need to be judged on its value to the wider archive community and be owned by the community.
More thoughts anyone?
Cathy
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Cathy Williams | Head of Collections Knowledge | Archives Sector Development
The National Archives | Kew | Richmond | Surrey TW9 4DU | 020 8392 5330 x2064 www.nationalarchives.gov.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: Archivists, conservators and records managers. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane Stevenson
Sent: 10 September 2012 15:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Plea regarding NCA Rules for hyphenated and compound surnames
Hi Teresa et al,
i agree that it is not always clear cut, but to my mind this is not a reason to structure a name incorrectly. Certainly we may continue to have instances where there are issues, due to the difficulty of knowing whether you have a compound surname or a single surname and two forenames. But we can reduce these as much as possible. Also, a number of cataloguers use AACR2 rules anyway, so we do have a mix at present - its not as if we have a consistent structuring of these names.
My perspective is obviously coming from an aggregator, but I think its more important to think more widely than single systems. the NCA Rules may work within individual systems, but in a global environment I just can't see how we can justify this practice. I'm surprised that the DNB follows this practice, and I'd like to know what their thinking was, but surely most names-based systems and services don't?
> I think the key thing for users is that if you search for a name it
> appears - whatever order of words you use George, David Lloyd, first
> Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor (1863-1945), prime minister Martyn, Edith
> How (1875-1954), suffragist and advocate of birth control
Yes, this is within a human interface, but I'm thinking of the increasing role of machine processing of data, and the potential for data analysis of various kinds.
I'm also thinking of initiatives like SNAC (http://socialarchive.iath.virginia.edu/xtf/view?docId=compton-burnett-i-ivy-1884-1969-cr.xml) and linking up with global hubs like VIAF (http://viaf.org/viaf/95173705/#Compton-Burnett,_I._%28Ivy%29,_1884-1969). It feels to me that it would be better to stick to structuring names in this way, in order to have the potential to work with these kinds of services.
> But revising a standard is a considerable undertaking. Previously the work was funded by 7 bodies, with considerable staff input from HMC. Where such resource would come from now is difficult to say.
A proper revision would no doubt be preferable, although maybe, if the community were to agree, revising just this part of the Rules would be possible?
I do appreciate that I have a certain perspective, and my arguments may not win out, but I guess I work so much with structured data, and trying to improve data consistency, that I do feel I want to at least raise this as an issue.
cheers,
Jane
On 10 Sep 2012, at 15:12, Doherty Teresa wrote:
> Hi
>
> I seem to remember that the issue was that hyphenated and compound surnames are rarely clear. To take another suffrage example 'Millicent Garrett Fawcett' is referred to both as Mrs Fawcett and as Millicent Garrett Fawcett. Similarly her sister 'Elizabeth Garrett Anderson' is referred to with both hyphenated and singular surnames.
>
> With many less known people where only a textual reference to the person remains it is impossible to tell if a middle name is a middle name or part of an official surname. Indeed some hyphenated first names (Anthony Paul) can be mistaken for surnames (Anthony Paul Smith). The lack of clarity is particularly true the further back in time you go.... Most archives are dealing with records from 'less well known' people, so it is a bit of a minefield.
>
> In order to gain consistency when indexing the decision was taken by the original NCA group to go with the latter element. It was hotly debated at the time and several times since. But the decision was made 'to simplify things' and get on with online indexing as quickly and consistently as possible.
>
> Interestingly the Oxford DNB sticks ultra-consistently with NCA Rules.
> I think the key thing for users is that if you search for a name it
> appears - whatever order of words you use George, David Lloyd, first
> Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor (1863-1945), prime minister Martyn, Edith
> How (1875-1954), suffragist and advocate of birth control
>
> Something else to note is that, the option to cross refer is available
> via ISAAR(cpf)
> 5.1.3 Parallel forms of name
> 5.1.4 Standardized forms of name according to other rules
> 5.1.5 Other forms of name
>
> So if anyone wants to use AACR2, or RDA, and cross refer this is a
> valid option. (Though remember AACR2 prefers not to use dates or
> epithets)
>
> There is also nothing to stop people using AACR2 as their main standard and then cross referring to NCA at a local level. The issue only becomes an issue when exporting data and trying to marry up index terms (e.g. Archives Hub) so there would need to be an automated process to NCA<->AACR2 provided by the Hub for those of us who may choose to remain with NCA.
>
> Re the ownership/revision: NCA is now part of ARA, so I guess it 'belongs' to the Society. There were several mutterings about the standard being revised over the years. And yes the NCA Rules are definitely worth revisiting! There are several issues which clunk along - especially when you look at Places and Corporates in any detail. And the production of new editions of ISAAR ISAD ISDF etc meand that revision is well overdue.
>
> But revising a standard is a considerable undertaking. Previously the work was funded by 7 bodies, with considerable staff input from HMC. Where such resource would come from now is difficult to say.
>
>
> Teresa
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Archivists, conservators and records managers.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stockting, William
> Sent: 10 September 2012 14:26
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Plea regarding NCA Rules for hyphenated and compound
> surnames
>
> Hi all,
>
> I whole heartedly agree with Jane here!
>
> There are perhaps some differences between the NCA rules and AACR2 that can be argued on the basis of the differences between archives and books, but I've never understood why this was the case for compound surnames. For this and other reasons, it would be good to take the NCA rules through a revision process, with convergence with other sector standards as a guiding principle perhaps. Standards in other areas have moved on and for example we might find RDA more congenial that AACR2.
> The initial question would be, who owns the NCA rules and who would therefore be responsible for their revision - it would be a significant effort!
>
> Yours,
>
> Bill
>
> S&C Cataloguing Systems and Processing Manager British Library
> Tel: (0)20 7412 7188
>
> Please think before you print!
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Archivists, conservators and records managers.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane Stevenson
> Sent: 10 September 2012 14:01
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Plea regarding NCA Rules for hyphenated and compound surnames
>
> Hi there,
>
> I would like to make a plea: can we consider a revision of the NCA Rules to stop what I think is a completely foolhardy practice of creating incorrect names?
>
> I am talking about the rules governing hyphenated and compound surnames.
> For reasons that I don't fully understand, a decision was taken to enter these under the 'last entry element'. What this effectively means is entering the name wrongly.
>
> E.g. Edith How-Martyn was a suffragette. I assume anyone looking her
> up or referring to her would reference her as 'How-Martyn'.
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edith_How-Martyn)
>
> Similarly, we speak of 'Lloyd George' not 'George' when referring to David Lloyd George.
>
> But because our Archives Hub contributors are following NCA Rules when they catalogue, we get records for "Martyn Edith How, 1871-1944" or "Lewis, Cecil Day- (1904-1972) poet".
>
> This problem is compounded because we endeavour to structure name entries with 'surname', 'forename', 'dates', etc. The more structure the better, in general, but not if you are identifying the surname as 'Lewis' and the Forename as 'Cecil Day'.
>
> We've been thinking about name authorities, and we are part of the SNAC project to create EAC encoded name records out of EAD records (http://socialarchive.iath.virginia.edu/), but we'll end up with a substantial number of wrongly created name entries as a result of this rule. This practice also flies in the face of the general move towards data mining and pattern matching that is helping many information communities to improve the utility of their data.
>
> For example, if we want to match up the entries for the archival creator (free text entries) and the entries of their name as an index term (structured entries), it is somewhat more difficult to match "Edith How Martyn" as the creator and "Martyn, Edith How" as the index entry. Its not impossible, but it just adds to the complexity that is already involved in trying to make names machine readable and create 'same as'
> links.
>
> I'd be really very interested to hear what others have to say about this. I feel that the rules were created when cross-referencing was commonplace, but now what is important is to have well-structured machine readable data.
>
> cheers,
> Jane.
>
>
> Jane Stevenson
> The Archives Hub
> Mimas, The University of Manchester
> Devonshire House, Oxford Road
> Manchester M13 9QH
>
> email:[log in to unmask]
> tel: 0161 275 6055
> website: archiveshub.ac.uk
> blog: archiveshub.ac.uk/blog
> twitter: twitter.com/archiveshub
>
> Contact the list owner for assistance at
> [log in to unmask]
>
> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during
> a
> holiday) see the list website at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
>
> Contact the list owner for assistance at
> [log in to unmask]
>
> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during
> a holiday) see the list website at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
>
> This email message has been delivered safely by Mimecast.
> For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com.
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------
>
> http://www.rcn.org.uk
>
> This email is confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Royal College of Nursing or any of its affiliates.
>
> If you are not the intended recipient be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error please return it to the sender immediately. The contents of this message may be legally privileged.
>
> Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom 20 Cavendish Square
> London W1G ORN
> Tel: +44 (0) 345 456 3996
> Fax: +44 (0) 20 7647 3436
>
> Contact the list owner for assistance at
> [log in to unmask]
> For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during
> a holiday) see the list website at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
>
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Archives Disclaimer
This email and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete the email.
Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact the list owner for assistance at [log in to unmask]
For information about joining, leaving and suspending mail (eg during a holiday) see the list website at
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=archives-nra
|
