Proposal by BL: Field of Activity of the Corporate Body (Revision of RDA 11.10.1.3)

6JSC/BL/23
1 July 2014

Field of Activity of the Corporate Body (Revision of RDA 11.10.1.3)

British Library (BL)
————————

6JSC/BL/23/ALA response: Field of Activity of the Corporate Body (Revision of RDA 11.10.1.3) (August 27, 2014)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Proposal by BL: Field of Activity of the Corporate Body (Revision of RDA 11.10.1.3)

  1. John Myers says:

    This produces a vague sense of deja vu — did we raise this very concern during the review of the RDA drafts? Although it may have been an issue of discussion that we didn’t pursue owing to the element’s configuration as a Note within the draft text (and so many other larger issues to bring forward).

  2. Robert Bratton says:

    I have always taken issue with the examples at RDA 11.10.1.3, and welcome these proposed changes!

    I like aligning RDA 11.10.1.3 with RDA 9.15.1.3, so that both Fields of activity sections look the same.

    Is RDA 11.11 Corporate history intended for recording contemporary as well as historical information about corporate bodies? If so, would it make sense to move one (or both) of the crossed out examples in this proposal from RDA 11.10.1.3 to RDA 11.11.1.3?

    • Dominique Bourassa says:

      The first time I saw the examples at 11.10.1.3, I did not understand why they were written as lengthy notes instead of a short terms like the examples at 9.15.1.3. So, like Robert, I welcome this proposal. To me, it makes sense (And this will be more useful in the machine-actionable word we seem to be heading toward)

      I also wonder (like Robert) if the wording of the first sentence could be closer to the wording at 9.15.1.3: Record the field or fields of endeavour, area or areas of expertise, etc., in which the corporate body is engaged or was engaged by recording a term indicating the field.

  3. Kathy Glennan says:

    I think the wording is different between 9.15.1.3 and 11.10.1.3 because the FRAD definitions are different:

    Attributes of a person:
    Field of activity
    A field of endeavour, area of expertise, etc., in which the person is engaged or was engaged.

    Attributes of a corporate body:
    Field of activity
    A field of business in which the corporate body is engaged, its area of competence, responsibility, jurisdiction, etc.

    Any wording modifications we might suggest should be based on the FRAD definition for corporate body attributes.

  4. Kathy Glennan says:

    After checking FRAD, I wonder if our response should suggest adding this element under families, at 10.9 (which would require renumbering the subsequent instructions). This is a FRAD attribute that isn’t in RDA, and I can’t think of a reason that it shouldn’t be.

    As long as we’re talking about how “field of activity” should be represented in RDA, it seems like we should bring families into the picture too. I would model a new instruction after the one for persons.

    Thoughts?

  5. Robert Bratton says:

    I also agree with Kathy — some families do have collective fields of activity.

  6. Steve Kelley says:

    I agree with Kathy as well.

  7. Tracey L. Snyder says:

    This all sounds good.

Leave a Reply