Philosophy:Critica Botanica

Title page of Carl Linnaeus's Critica Botanica of 1737.

Critica Botanica ("Critique of botany", Leiden, July 1737) was written by Swedish botanist, physician, zoologist and naturalist Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778). The book was published in Germany when Linnaeus was 29 with a discursus by the botanist Johannes Browallius (1707–1755), bishop of Åbo. The first edition was published in July 1737 under the full title Critica botanica in qua nomina plantarum generica, specifica & variantia examini subjiciuntur, selectoria confirmantur, indigna rejiciuntur; simulque doctrina circa denominationem plantarum traditur. Seu Fundamentorum botanicorum pars IV Accedit Johannis Browallii De necessitate historiae naturalis discursus.

Linnaeus's principles of botanical nomenclature were first expounded in Fundamenta Botanica ("Foundations of botany") of 1736, in chapters VII to X which contained the aphorisms (principles) 210 to 324 that outlined the rules for the acceptance and formation of names. These were later elaborated, with numerous examples, in his Critica Botanica of 1737. The practical application of these rules was soon seen in subsequent publications such as Flora Lapponica ("Flora of Lapland", 1737), Hortus Cliffortianus ("In honour of Clifford's garden", 1738), and Flora Svecica ("Flora of Sweden", 1746). Together the Fundamenta and Critica summarised Linnaeus's thoughts on plant nomenclature and classification which he later revised and elaborated in his Philosophia Botanica of 1751.

In the Critica, Linnaeus presented a series of rules which guided him in his own publications, established standards of procedure for his followers, and led him to discard on a grand scale the names used by his predecessors. Many of his canons have long since been disregarded, but they ensured that modern botanical nomenclature at least began with a series of well-formed, euphonious and convenient names.

Binomial nomenclature

Main article: Biology:Binomial nomenclature

To understand the objectives of the Critica it is first necessary to appreciate the state of botanical nomenclature at the time of Linnaeus. In accordance with the provisions of the present-day International Code of Botanical Nomenclature the starting point for the scientific names of plants effectively dates back to the list of species enumerated in Linnaeus's Species Plantarum, ed. 1, published 1 May 1753. The Species Plantarum was, for European scientists, a comprehensive global Flora for its day, and by the 10th edition had reached over 3000 species. Linnaeus had learned plant names as short descriptive phrases (polynomials) known as nomina specifica. Each time a new species was described the diagnostic phrase-names had to be adjusted, and lists of names, especially those including synonyms (alternative names for the same plant) became extremely unwieldy. Linnaeus's solution was to associate with the generic name an additional single word, what he termed the nomen triviale, to designate a species. Linnaeus emphasized that this was simply a matter of convenience, it was not to replace the diagnostic nomen specificum. But over time the nomen triviale became the “real” name and the nomen specificum became the Latin “diagnosis” that must, according to the rules of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, accompany the description of all new plant species: it was that part of the plant description distinguishing that particular species from all others. Linnaeus did not invent the binomial system but he was the person who provided the theoretical framework that lead to its universal acceptance.

The second word of the binomial, the nomen triviale as Linnaeus called it, is now known as the specific epithet and the two words, the generic name and specific epithet together make up the species name.

Historical context of Linnaean publications

Main article: Biography:Carl Linnaeus

Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778) who established the binomial system of plant nomenclature.

Systema Naturæ was Linnaeus's early attempt to organise nature. The first edition was published in 1735 and in it he outlines his ideas for the hierarchical classification of the natural world (the “system of nature”) by dividing it into the animal kingdom (Regnum animale), the plant kingdom (Regnum vegetabile) and the "mineral kingdom" (Regnum lapideum) each of which he further divided into classes, orders, genera and species, with [generic] characters, [specific] differences, synonyms, and places of occurrence. The tenth edition of this book in 1758 has been adopted as the starting point for zoological nomenclature. The first edition of 1735 was just eleven pages long, but this expanded with further editions until the final thirteenth edition of 1767 had reached over 3000 pages.

In the early eighteenth century colonial expansion and exploration created a demand for the description of thousands of new organisms. This highlighted difficulties in communication about plants, the replication of descriptions, and the importance of an agreed way of presenting, publishing and applying plant names. From about 1730 when Linnaeus was in his early twenties and still in Uppsala, Sweden, he planned a listing of all the genera and species of plants known to western science in his day. Before this could be achieved, he needed to establish the principles of classification and nomenclature on which these works were to be based.

“ We can never hope for a lasting peace and better times till Botanists come to an agreement among themselves about the fixed laws in accordance with which judgment can be pronounced on names. ”

The Dutch period

From 1735 to 1738 Linnaeus worked in the Netherlands where he was personal physician to George Clifford (1685–1760) a wealthy Anglo-Dutch merchant–banker with the Dutch East India Company who had an impressive garden containing four large glasshouses that were filled with tropical and sub-tropical plants collected overseas. Linnaeus was enthralled by these collections and prepared a detailed systematic catalogue of the plants in the garden, which he published in 1738 as Hortus Cliffortianus. It was during this exceptionally productive period of his life that he published the works that were to lay the foundations for biological nomenclature. These were Fundamenta Botanica (1736) ("Foundations of botany"), Bibliotheca Botanica ("Botanical bibliography", 1736), and Critica Botanica (1737) He soon put his theoretical ideas into practice in his Genera Plantarum ("Genera of plants", 1737), Flora Lapponica (1737), Classes Plantarum ("Plant classes", 1738), and Hortus Cliffortianus (1738). The ideas he explored in these works were revised until, in 1751, his mature thinking was finally published as Philosophia Botanica ("Science of botany") released simultaneously in Stockholm and Amsterdam.

Species plantarum

Main article: Biology:Species Plantarum

With the foundations of plant nomenclature and classification now in place Linnaeus then set about the monumental task of describing all the plants known in his day and, with the publication of Species Plantarum in 1753, his ambitions of the 1730s were finally accomplished. Species Plantarum was his most acclaimed work and a summary of all his botanical knowledge. Here was a global Flora that codified the usage of morphological terminology and acted as a bibliography of all the pre-Linnaean botanical literature of scientific importance. It presented his new 'sexual system' of plant classification and became the starting point for scientific botanical nomenclature for 6000 of the 10,000 species he estimated made up the world's flora. Here too, for the first time, the species, rather than the genus, becomes the fundamental taxonomic unit. Linnaeus defined species as " ... all structures in nature that do not owe their shape to the conditions of the growth place and other occasional features.” There was also the innovation of the now familiar nomen triviale (pl. nomina trivialia) of the binary name although Linnaeus still regarded the real names as the differentiae specificae or “phrase names” which embodied the diagnosis for the species – although be was eventually to regard the trivial name (specific epithet) as one of his great inventions. Sketches of the book are known from 1733 and the final effort resulted in his temporary collapse.

Fundamenta, Critica and Philosophia

Main article: Biology:Philosophia Botanica

The Fundamenta Botanica (“The Foundations of Botany”) of 1736 consisted of 365 aphorisms (principles) with principles 210–324 devoted to nomenclature. He followed this form of presentation in his other work on nomenclature. Linnaeus apparently regarded these as a “grammar and a syntax” for the study of botany. Chapters VII to X comprised principles 210 to 324 to do with the nomenclature of genera, species and varieties and how to treat synonyms. The Critica Botanica was an extension of these nomenclatural chapters of the Fundamenta. Critica Botanica which was published a year later in July 1737, the principles of the Fundamenta are repeated essentially unchanged but with extensive additions in smaller print. It was this work, with its dogmatic, often amusing and provocative statements, that was to spread his ideas and enthrall intellects of the stature of Goethe. He was, however, dismissive of botanical work other than taxonomy and presented his principles as dogma rather than reasoned argument.

These works established ground rules in a field which, at this time, had only “gentlemen's agreements”. Conventions such as: no two genera should have the same name; no universally agreed mechanisms. Genera Plantarum ran to five editions, the first in 1737 containing short descriptions of the 935 plant genera known at that time. Observing his own principle to keep generic names as short, euphonious, distinctive and memorable as possible he rejected many names that had gone before, including those of his fellow botanists which was not popular. In their place he used names that commemorated patrons, friends and fellow botanists as well as many names taken from Greek and Roman mythology.

Table of contents

1.1 Contents

1.1.1 Generic names (Nomina Generica)

1.1.2 Species names (Nomina Specifica)

1.1.3 Variety names (Nomina Variantia)

1.1.4 Synonyms – (Nomina Synonyma)

1.2 Names in honour of persons

1.3 Editions

1.4 Reviews

English translation of some principles

By far the most important section of the Critica is that dealing with generic names – here we clearly see the forces shaping the present-day provisions of the Botanical Code. In the Philosophia Botanica § 159 Linnaeus had stated that a genus of plants was a group of species possessing similarly constructed organs of fructification, i.e. flowers and fruits, and hence distinguishable by these from other genera. Some examples of the aphorisms (principles) concerned with genera are given below:

§ 213 All those plants which belong to one genus must be designated by the same generic name.

Quaecunque plantae genere conveniunt, eodem nomine generico designandae sunt.

§ 214 All those plants which belong to different genera must be designated by different generic names.

Quaecunque, e contrario, plantae genere differunt, diverso nomine generico designandae sunt.

§ 217 If one and the same generic name has been adopted to designate two different genera, it will have to be banished from one of the positions which it occupies.

Nominum genericum unum idemque, ad diversa designandum genera assumtum, altero loco excludendum erit.

§ 228 Generic names with a similar sound lead to confusion.

Nominum Genericorum terminatio & Sonus, quantity fieri possit, facilitanda sunt.

§ 238 The pronunciation of the name should be made as easy as possible.

Nomina Generica Sesquipedalia, enunciatu difficilia, vel nausepsa, fugienda sunt.

§ 247 Greek generic names are to be written in Latin characters.

Nomina Generica Greaca Latinis literis pingenda sunt.

Linnaeus considered that generic names should be apt in meaning, pleasant to hear, easy to say, and not more than 12 letters long. He advocates the use of commemorative personal names as botanical names, quoting his own name as an example:

“ it is commonly believed that the name of a plant which is derived from that of a botanist shows no connection between the two ... [but] ... Linnaea was named by the celebrated Gronovius and is a plant of Lapland, lowly, insignificant, disregarded, flowering but for a brief space — after Linnaeus who resembles it. ”

And in relation to specific names:

§ 225 A plant is completely named when it is furnished with a generic and specific name.

§ 256 The specific name should distinguish the plant from all others of the same genus.

§ 258 The specific name will identify the plant which bears it at the first glance, since it expresses the differentia which is imprinted on the plant itself.

Historical assessment

Linnaeus's system of classification follows the principles of Aristotelian logic, by which arranging subjects into classes is classification; distinguishing divisions of classes is logical division. The group to be divided is the genus; the parts into which it is divided are the species. The terms genus and species acquired their specialized biological usage from Linnaeus's predecessors, in particular Ray and Tournefort. There was also the question of whether plants should a) be put together or separated because they conform to a definition (essentialism) or b) put together with plants having similar characteristics generally, regardless of the definition (empiricism). Linnaeus was inclined to take the first approach using the Method of Logical Division based on definition, what he called in Philosophia Botanica §152 the dispositio theoretica – but in practice he employed both methods.

Botanical historian Alan Morton, though praising Linnaeus's contribution to classification and nomenclature, is less complimentary about the theoretical ideas expressed in the publications discussed above:

“ Linnaeus was the master of the botany of his time, and his influence on the development of botanical science powerful and lasting … his work demonstrated the success of his improved methods of description, diagnosis and nomenclature, and made detailed systematic observation the guide and criterion in taxonomy. ... In his theoretical ideas, on the contrary, Linnaeus was a man of the past who never escaped from the restricting circle of idealist-essentialist thought in which his early high school training had confined him. This was the background to the contradictory statements in the Philosophia, to his narrow view of botany, his blindness to the advances in plant physiology and anatomy, [and] his unquestioning acceptance of special creation. ”

Linnaean historian, chronicler, and analyst Frans Stafleu points out that Linnaeus's training and background was scholastic. He excelled in logic ..."which was almost certainly the Aristotelian and Thomistic logic generally taught in secondary schools all over Europe".:

“ Linnaeus's methods were based on philosophical principles and logical a priori assumptions which gradually lost their relevance to the natural sciences during the eighteenth century. Even so, the direct results of his work were salutary: descriptions were standardised, ranks fixed, names given according to precise rules and a classification proposed which permitted rapid and efficient storage and retrieval of taxonomic information. No wonder that much of what Linnaeus proposed stood the test of time. The designation of species by binary names which have the character of code designations is only one element out of many which show the profound practicality underlying Linnaeus's activities and publications. ”

Linnaeus's philosophical approach to classification is also noted by botanist David Frodin who observed that applying the methodus naturalis to books and people as well as plants, animals and minerals, was a mark of Linnaeus's ‘scholastic’ view of the world:

“ Most subsequent [to Linnaeus's Bibliotheca Botanica] classifications of botanical literature, including geographical entities, would be more or less empirically based highlighting a recurrent conflict between essentialism, empiricism, nominalism and other doctrines in the theory and practice of any kind of classification. ”

Finally, Linnaean scholar William T. Stearn has summarised Linnaeus's contribution to biology as follows:

“ By the introduction of his binomial system of nomenclature Linnaeus gave plants and animals an essentially Latin nomenclature like vernacular nomenclature in style but linked to published, and hence relatively stable and verifiable, scientific concepts and thus suitable for international use. This was his most important contribution to biology. ”

Bibliographic details

Full bibliographic details including exact dates of publication, pagination, editions, facsimiles, brief outline of contents, location of copies, secondary sources, translations, reprints, travelogues, and commentaries are given in Stafleu and Cowan's Taxonomic Literature.

Bibliography

• Ekedahl, Nils (2005). "Collecting Flowers. Linnaean Method and the Humanist Art of Reading". Symbolae Botanicae Upsaliensis 33 (3): 9–19. 
• Frodin, David 2002. Guide to Standard Floras of the World, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
• Hort, Arthur 1938. The “Critica Botanica” of Linnaeus. London : Ray Society. (English translation rev. M.L. Green, with Introduction by Sir Arthur Hill)
• Jonsell, Bengt (2005). "Linnaeus at his Zenith – the Rise to the Species Plantarum and its Aftermath". Symbolae Botanicae Upsaliensis 33 (3): 9–19. 
• Jørgensen, Per M. (2005). "Linnaeus at Work with 'Species Plantarum". Symbolae Botanicae Upsaliensis 33 (3): 81–89. 
• Morton, Alan G. (1981). History of Botanical Science: An Account of the Development of Botany from Ancient Times to the Present Day. London: Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-508382-3. https://archive.org/details/historyofbotanic0000mort. 
• Sprague, T.A. (1953). "Linnaeus as a Nomenclaturist". Taxon 2 (3): 40–46. doi:10.2307/1217339. 
• Stafleu, Frans A. 1971. Linnaeus and the Linnaeans: the Spreading of their Ideas in Systematic Botany, 1735–1789. Utrecht: International Association for Plant Taxonomy. ISBN 90-6046-064-2.
• Stafleu, Frans A. & Cowan, Richard S. 1981. Taxonomic Literature. A Selective Guide to Botanical Publications with dates, Commentaries and Types. Vol III: Lh–O. Regnum Vegetabile 105.
• Stearn, William T. 1960. “Notes on Linnaeus’s ‘Genera Plantarum’”. In Carl Linnaeus, Genera plantarum fifth edition 1754. Facsimile reprint Weinheim. Historiae Naturalis Classica 3.
• Stearn, William T. 1971. In Blunt, William. The Compleat Naturalist: a Life of Linnaeus. New York: Frances Lincoln. ISBN 0-7112-1841-2.
• Stearn, William T. 1983. Botanical Latin. London: David & Charles. ISBN 0-7153-8548-8.
• Stearn, William T. 1986. Linnaeus and his students. In "The Oxford Companion to Gardens". Jellicoe, Geoffrey et al. (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-866123-1.

Short description: Unique headings used for bibliographic information

In information science, authority control is a process that organizes information, for example in library catalogs, by using a single, distinct spelling of a name (heading) or an (generally alphanumeric) identifier for each topic or concept. The word authority in authority control derives from the idea that the names of people, places, things, and concepts are authorized, i.e., they are established in one particular form. These one-of-a-kind headings or identifiers are applied consistently throughout catalogs which make use of the respective authority file, and are applied for other methods of organizing data such as linkages and cross references. Each controlled entry is described in an authority record in terms of its scope and usage, and this organization helps the library staff maintain the catalog and make it user-friendly for researchers.

Catalogers assign each subject—such as author, topic, series, or corporation—a particular unique identifier or heading term which is then used consistently, uniquely, and unambiguously for all references to that same subject, which removes variations from different spellings, transliterations, pen names, or aliases. The unique header can guide users to all relevant information including related or collocated subjects. Authority records can be combined into a database and called an authority file, and maintaining and updating these files as well as "logical linkages" to other files within them is the work of librarians and other information catalogers. Accordingly, authority control is an example of controlled vocabulary and of bibliographic control.

While in theory any piece of information is amenable to authority control such as personal and corporate names, uniform titles, series names, and subjects, library catalogers typically focus on author names and titles of works. Traditionally, one of the most commonly used authority files globally are the subject headings from the Library of Congress. More recently, links to articles and categories of Wikipedia emerged to function as an authority file due to the popularity of the encyclopedia, where each article is a notable topic or concept similar to other authority files.

As time passes, information changes, prompting needs for reorganization. According to one view, authority control is not about creating a perfect seamless system but rather it is an ongoing effort to keep up with these changes and try to bring "structure and order" to the task of helping users find information.

Benefits of authority control

• Better researching. Authority control helps researchers understand a specific subject with less wasted effort. A well-designed digital catalog/database enables a researcher to query a few words of an entry to bring up the already established term or phrase, thus improving accuracy and saving time.
• Makes searching more predictable. It can be used in conjunction with keyword searching using "and" or "not" or "or" or other Boolean operators on a web browser. It increases chances that a given search will return relevant items.
• Consistency of records.
• Organization and structure of information.
• Efficiency for catalogers. The process of authority control is not only of great help to researchers searching for a particular subject to study, but it can help catalogers organize information as well. Catalogers can use authority records when trying to categorize new items, since they can see which records have already been cataloged and can therefore avoid unnecessary work.
• Maximizes library resources.
• Easier to maintain the catalog. It enables catalogers to detect and correct errors. In some instances, software programs support workers tasked with maintaining the catalog to do ongoing tasks such as automated clean-up. It helps creators and users of metadata.
• Fewer errors. It can help catch errors caused by typos or misspellings which can sometimes accumulate over time, sometimes known as quality drift. For example, machines can catch misspellings such as "Elementary school "teachers" and "Pumpkins" which can then be corrected by library staff.

Examples

Diverse names describe the same subject

Princess Diana is described in one authority file as "Windsor, Diana, Princess of Wales" which is an official heading.

Sometimes within a catalog, there are diverse names or spellings for only one person or subject. This variation may cause researchers to overlook relevant information. Authority control is used by catalogers to collocate materials that logically belong together but that present themselves differently. Records are used to establish uniform titles that collocate all versions of a given work under one unique heading even when such versions are issued under different titles. With authority control, one unique preferred name represents all variations and will include different variations, spellings and misspellings, uppercase versus lowercase variants, differing dates, and so forth. For example, in Wikipedia, the first wife of Charles III is described by an article Diana, Princess of Wales as well as numerous other descriptors, e.g. Princess Diana, but both Princess Diana and Diana, Princess of Wales describe the same person so they all redirect to the same main article; in general, all authority records choose one title as the preferred one for consistency. In an online library catalog, various entries might look like the following:

1. Diana. (1)
2. Diana, Princess of Wales. (1)
3. Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961–1997. (13)
4. Diana, Princess of Wales 1961–1997. (1)
5. Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961–1997. (2)
6. DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES, 1961–1997. (1)

These terms describe the same person. Accordingly, authority control reduces these entries to one unique entry or officially authorized heading, sometimes termed an access point: Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961–1997.

Authority File	Heading / ID
Virtual International Authority File	VIAF ID: 107032638
Wikipedia	Diana, Princess of Wales
Wikidata	Wikidata identifier: Q9685
Integrated Authority File (GND)	GND ID: 118525123
U.S. Library of Congress	Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961–1997
WorldCat Identities	Diana Princess of Wales 1961–1997
Biblioteca Nacional de España	Windsor, Diana, Princess of Wales
KANTO – National Agent Data (Finland)	Diana, Walesin prinsessa / KANTO ID: 000104109
Getty Union List of Artist Names	Diana, Princess of Wales English noble and patron, 1961–1997
National Library of the Netherlands	Diana, prinses van Wales, 1961–1997

Generally, there are different authority file headings and identifiers used by different libraries in different countries, possibly inviting confusion, but there are different approaches internationally to try to lessen the confusion. One international effort to prevent such confusion is the Virtual International Authority File which is a collaborative attempt to provide a single heading for a particular subject. It is a way to standardize information from different authority files around the world such as the Integrated Authority File (GND) maintained and used cooperatively by many libraries in German-speaking countries and the United States Library of Congress. The idea is to create a single worldwide virtual authority file. For example, the ID for Princess Diana in the GND is 118525123 (preferred name: Diana < Wales, Prinzessin>) while the United States Library of Congress uses the term Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961–1997; other authority files have other choices. The Virtual International Authority File choice for all of these variations is VIAF ID: 107032638 — that is, a common number representing all of these variations.

The English Wikipedia prefers the term "Diana, Princess of Wales", but at the bottom of the article about her, there are links to various international cataloging efforts for reference purposes.

Same name describes two different subjects

Sometimes two different authors have been published under the same name. This can happen if there is a title which is identical to another title or to a collective uniform title. This, too, can cause confusion. Different authors can be distinguished correctly from each other by, for example, adding a middle initial to one of the names; in addition, other information can be added to one entry to clarify the subject, such as birth year, death year, range of active years such as 1918–1965 when the person flourished, or a brief descriptive epithet. When catalogers come across different subjects with similar or identical headings, they can disambiguate them using authority control.

Authority records and files

A customary way of enforcing authority control in a bibliographic catalog is to set up a separate index of authority records, which relates to and governs the headings used in the main catalog. This separate index is often referred to as an "authority file". It contains an indexable record of all decisions made by catalogers in a given library (or—as is increasingly the case—cataloging consortium), which catalogers consult when making, or revising, decisions about headings. As a result, the records contain documentation about sources used to establish a particular preferred heading, and may contain information discovered while researching the heading which may be useful.

While authority files provide information about a particular subject, their primary function is not to provide information but to organize it. They contain enough information to establish that a given author or title is unique, but that is all; irrelevant but interesting information is generally excluded. Although practices vary internationally, authority records in the English-speaking world generally contain the following information:

• Headings show the preferred title chosen as the official and authorized version. It is important that the heading be unique; if there is a conflict with an identical heading, then one of the two will have to be chosen:

Since the headings function as access points, making sure that they are distinct and not in conflict with existing entries is important. For example, the English novelist William Collins (1824–89), whose works include the Moonstone and The Woman in White is better known as Wilkie Collins. Cataloguers have to decide which name the public would most likely look under, and whether to use a see also reference to link alternative forms of an individual's name.

—Mason, M.K., http://www.moyak.com/papers/libraries-bibliographic-control.html

• Cross references are other forms of the name or title that might appear in the catalog and include:

1. see references are forms of the name or title that describe the subject but which have been passed over or deprecated in favor of the authorized heading form
2. see also references point to other forms of the name or title that are also authorized. These see also references generally point to earlier or later forms of a name or title.

• Statement(s) of justification is a brief account made by the cataloger about particular information sources used to determine both authorized and deprecated forms. Sometimes this means citing the title and publication date of the source, the location of the name or title on that source, and the form in which it appears on that source.

For example, the Irish writer Brian O'Nolan, who lived from 1911 to 1966, wrote under many pen names such as Flann O'Brien and Myles na Gopaleen. Catalogers at the United States Library of Congress chose one form—"O'Brien, Flann, 1911–1966"—as the official heading. The example contains all three elements of a valid authority record: the first heading O'Brien, Flann, 1911–1966 is the form of the name that the Library of Congress chose as authoritative. In theory, every record in the catalog that represents a work by this author should have this form of the name as its author heading. What follows immediately below the heading beginning with Na Gopaleen, Myles, 1911–1966 are the see references. These forms of the author's name will appear in the catalog, but only as transcriptions and not as headings. If a user queries the catalog under one of these variant forms of the author's name, he or she would receive the response: "See O'Brien, Flann, 1911–1966." There is an additional spelling variant of the Gopaleen name: "Na gCopaleen, Myles, 1911–1966" has an extra C inserted because the author also employed the non-anglicized Irish spelling of his pen-name, in which the capitalized C shows the correct root word while the preceding g indicates its pronunciation in context. So if a library user comes across this spelling variant, he or she will be led to the same author regardless. See also references, which point from one authorized heading to another authorized heading, are exceedingly rare for personal name authority records, although they often appear in name authority records for corporate bodies. The final four entries in this record beginning with His At Swim-Two-Birds ... 1939. constitute the justification for this particular form of the name: it appeared in this form on the 1939 edition of the author's novel At Swim-Two-Birds, whereas the author's other noms de plume appeared on later publications.

Card catalog records such as this one used to be physical cards contained in long rectangular drawers in a library; today, generally, this information is stored in online databases.

Authority control with "Kesey, Ken" as the chosen heading.

Access control

The act of choosing a single authorized heading to represent all forms of a name is quite often a difficult and complex task, considering that any given individual may have legally changed their name or used a variety of legal names in the course of their lifetime, as well as a variety of nicknames, pen names, stage names or other alternative names. It may be particularly difficult to choose a single authorized heading for individuals whose various names have controversial political or social connotations, when the choice of authorized heading may be seen as endorsement of the associated political or social ideology.

An alternative to using authorized headings is the idea of access control, where various forms of a name are related without the endorsement of one particular form.

Cooperative cataloging

Before the advent of digital online public access catalogs and the Internet, individual cataloging departments within each library generally carried out creating and maintaining a library's authority files. Naturally, there was a considerable difference in the authority files of the different libraries. For the early part of library history, it was generally accepted that, as long as a library's catalog was internally consistent, the differences between catalogs in different libraries did not matter greatly.

As libraries became more attuned to the needs of researchers and began interacting more with other libraries, the value of standard cataloging practices came to be recognized. With the advent of automated database technologies, catalogers began to establish cooperative consortia, such as OCLC and RLIN in the United States , in which cataloging departments from libraries all over the world contributed their records to, and took their records from, a shared database. This development prompted the need for national standards for authority work.

In the United States, the primary organization for maintaining cataloging standards with respect to authority work operates under the aegis of the Library of Congress Program for Cooperative Cataloging. It is known as the Name Authority Cooperative Program, or NACO Authority.

Standards

There are various standards using different acronyms.

Standards for authority metadata:

• MARC standards for authority records in machine-readable format.
• Metadata Authority Description Schema (MADS), an XML schema for an authority element set that may be used to provide metadata about agents (people, organizations), events, and terms (topics, geographics, genres, etc.).
• Encoded Archival Context, an XML schema for authority records conforming to ISAAR.

Standards for object identification, controlled by an identification-authority:

• Legal personality identification systems (person-IDs) and authorities:
  • ISAAR (CPF) – International Standard Archival Authority Record for Corporate Bodies, Persons, and Families. Published by the International Council on Archives
  • ISNI – International Standard Name Identifier
    • ORCID – Open Researcher and Contributor ID, a subset of the ISNI, to uniquely identify scientific and other academic authors.
    • DAI – Digital Author Identification, another subset of ISNI.
  • GRID – Global Research Identifier Database
  • GND – Integrated Authority File (Gemeinsame Normdatei), authority file for personal names, corporate bodies and subject headings.
  • KANTO – National Agent Data (finaf), authority file for persons and corporate bodies.
  • LCCN – Library of Congress Control Number
  • NDL – National Diet Library
  • VIAF – Virtual International Authority File, an aggregation of authority files currently focused on personal and corporate names.
  • WorldCat/identities
• Bibliographic object identification systems and authorities:
  • DOI – Digital object identifier
  • urn:lex, for law-document identifiers, controlled by local law authorities.
  • ISBN – International Standard Book Number
  • ISSN – International Standard Serial Number
• Other identification systems (for generic named-entities) and authorities:
  • GeoNames
  • TGN - Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names

Standards for identified-object metadata (examples): vCard, Dublin Core, etc.

See also

• Knowledge Organization Systems
• Library classification systems:
  • Dewey Decimal Classification
  • Library of Congress Classification
• Ontology (information science)
• Proprietary services
  • ResearcherID
• Registration authority
• Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS)