My question actually was about physical reproductions. Isn't LC practice already delineated in LCPS 27.1.1.3? I'm asking because I could see some workflow issues. Since we do our cataloging in Voyager, what happens if the linking field uses the handle for the record in our database?

Steven Arakawa
Catalog Librarian for Training & Documentation
Catalog & Metadata Services, SML, Yale University
P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 
(203)432-8286 [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mark Ehlert
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 5:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Policy on reproductions in RDA

Culbertson, Rebecca <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> At the PCC Ops meeting in 2011, there was strong preference to keep
> using the provider-neutral model for the time being even when all else
> in a record was RDA.

Any word on non-electronic reproductions (photocopies, microfilm, facsimiles, etc.)?

There was a paper issued by LC(?) a couple years ago on a proposed move away from LCRI 1.11A and toward AACR2/RDA practice. Though LC was supposed to have made a decision on this point either before their RDA Day One announcement or before the day itself, none has been forthcoming, at least up to now. Will PCC follow LC practice when it's made? Or forge their own path?

--
Mark K. Ehlert                 Minitex
Coordinator                    University of Minnesota Bibliographic & Technical      15 Andersen Library
  Services (BATS) Unit         222 21st Avenue South
Phone: 612-624-0805            Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439 <http://www.minitex.umn.edu/>