Following are some comments on the March 21, 2007 draft of Chapter 3. They 
are basically the same as what I sent to the RDA list earlier this month. I 
am submitting these to this list as food for thought only. The instructions 
for submitting formal comments say to select a single channel for providing 
comments, and I am already on a couple of RDA task forces, both of which 
feed into the CC:DA response. Therefore, I don't want to submit these as 
formal comments, but rather as thoughts which I had when I read the draft. 
Other people can pursue anything which might strike them as important for 
the formal PCC comments. I thought people might be particularly interested 
in the comments that are not related to continuing resources - the two task 
forces that I am on only deal with serials and integrating resources.


Background, Specific Elements (cover letter, p. 9) Media type, Carrier 
type, and Content type - I like the use of the term "volume" instead of "book".

Same section, Changes in carrier characteristics (cover letter, p. 10) - I 
like not requiring a new description if a resource changes carrier. 
However, it's not always easy to tell whether the carrier has changed or 
there are simultaneous carriers.  In addition, what's true today may not be 
true tomorrow. For example, it may look like the publisher has changed from 
print to online, but then the publisher goes back and digitizes past issue 
so it later looks like it was issued simultaneously in print and online. 
Actually, was a change from carrier type such as volume to carrier type 
such as online resource intended to be included in this guideline? Or was 
it intended only for changes in carrier type within the same media type, 
such as a change from CDROM to DVD, which would both be media type 
computer. After having said that, I went to look at the list of carrier 
types in and I don't see either CDROM or DVD. It looks to me like 
they would both be called computer disc. Is that correct?

I know no constituency response is needed for Appendix 1, but I was curious 
what a serial example would look like, so I tried to do one, to see if I 
understood the concepts and to see if there are any special problems with 
serials. After going through the exercise, I wonder if there should be 
something in the carrier or content description that says this is a serial. 
As much as I dislike the "v." in the 300, I know that it is sometimes used 
as a clue that a record is for a serial. Or will we rely on other clues 
like bibliographic format, presence of 362 information, etc.?

I am curious about the 2 cartographic examples E and F. For the Globe, 
wouldn't Carrier type be "other unmediated carrier"? (see 
Actually, why isn't globe listed as an unmediated carrier? For the Map, 
wouldn't Carrier type be sheet?  It is listed under unmediated carrier in Under, it shows a carrier type of sheet and then the 
extent of the same resource as 1 map. If it's not on a sheet, wouldn't the 
Carrier type be "other unmediated carrier"?

Now for comments on Chapter 3 itself., "When describing a facsimile or reproduction, record the elements 
describing the carrier as they apply to the facsimile or reproduction." - I 
think there should be a reference to, "Apply the instructions 
given under, if desired, as an alternative means of 
specifying the number of subunits in a resource of any carrier type in 
which text is presented in a format that parallels that of a printed or 
manuscript volume(s) ... (e.g., a microfilm reproduction of an atlas, a 
digital text in PDF).", Resource issued in successive parts, "If carrier 
characteristics are changed (or if new carrier characteristics are 
introduced) in a subsequent issue or part, record the changed (or new) 
characteristics as instructed under 3.6-3.20." - I don't understand the 
reference to 3.6-3.20.  Sections 3.6-3.20 are Base material, Applied 
material, Mount, Production method, Generation, etc. Also, same section 
last sentence, "Make a note if the change is considered important for 
identification or selection (see" That should be Last sentence, see reference should be to - I have a question on the media type. If it's online audio or 
video, is the media type computer rather than audio or video? - I wonder if it would be possible to put the list of types of 
carrier in a table like the types of media in I think it would 
be easier to find a specific list/table quickly if they all have the same 
format. Audio carriers, etc. could be in the column on the left and then 
audio cartridge, audio cylinder, audio disc, etc., in the column on the 
right. It could be called Table 2.  I was also curious why globe wasn't 
included under Unmediated carriers. - "Optional addition. When the resource is complete (or if the 
total number of units issued is known), add the number of units." I think 
it might be good to have a reference to, "For serials, record 
the extent by giving the number of bibliographic volumes ...  . " - "For resources consisting of text in other media (e.g., 
microforms), follow the basic instructions given under 3.4.0." This seems 
to contradict what it just said in, "Apply the instructions given 
under, if desired, as an alternative means of specifying 
the number of subunits in a resource of any carrier type in which text is 
presented in a format that parallels that of a printed or manuscript 
volume(s) ... (e.g., a microform reproduction of an atlas, a digital text 
in PDF)." If I understand this correctly, the rule for a microform would be 
to record the extent as x microfilm reels (, but as an 
alternative, you could give the extent as x volumes if it's a microfilm 
reproduction of a text serial ( If that is indeed correct, I 
think it might be clearer to have the rule in precede the 
alternative in Actually, having read this again, it occurred to 
me that maybe what it is saying is that you could record the extent of a 
microfilm reproduction as 3 reels (6 volumes). If that is correct, then 
maybe there needs to be a reference to Also one from to here. - If someone customizes RDA for serials, will this rule be 
included? If not, then I think there should be a reference to it from, even though it is right before this rule. - "Make a note if not all units of a resource issued in more than 
one unit have been issued and it appears that the resource will not be 
continued (see" Example is "No more published". I wondered if 
this rule applied to serials. Serials are included in section, 
"More than one volume" Is that different than "Resource issued in more than 
one unit ..." ( - "Alternative: If the carriers ... are of more than 2 sizes, 
record the greatest height of any of them followed by the greatest width of 
any of them and or smaller". I was wondering whether we will apply this to 
serials. There is a reference from, Resource issued in 
successive parts, to, so I assume we could say "32 cm or smaller" 
for a serial run which consists of volumes of more than 2 sizes. I think I 
like this alternative. - There are no instructions for a multipart monograph issued 
simultaneously. Is it possible that such a resource could have volumes with 
different sizes? - Reference should be to - Reference should be to - I just want to be sure that I understand this rule. Does it 
mean that a change from CDROM to DVD would not require a new record? How 
about CDROM to online? How about print to CDROM? How about print to online?

Addendum to RDA Part A - Chapter 4

I'm wondering whether chapter 4 should precede chapter 3. Chapter 4 deals 
with attributes of the work and expression and chapter 3 deals with 
attributes of the manifestation. The order of chapter 4 has attributes of 
the work preceding attributes of the expression. So the overall order is 
manifestation, then work, then expression. It seems to me like it should 
either be manifestation, then expression, then work or it should be work, 
then expression, then manifestation. I seem to remember a discussion about 
this with the previous draft, but I can't remember what the order was 
before. I'm at my daughter's house and don't have anything with me except 
the 21 March 2007 draft of Chapter 3 and Addendum to Chapter 4. This is not 
something I feel strongly about, just something that struck me as I looked 
at the contents to Chapter 4. - I noticed the table in this section is called Table 1, so I 
assume the numbering of tables starts over with each chapter. I wonder if 
it would make more sense to give each table a unique number in case someone 
wants to go directly to a table in the online version of RDA. - I was wondering why Braille is sometimes capitalized and 
sometimes not. It appears from the notes under the examples in 
that if a resource is described by an agency in the United Kingdom, it is 
capitalized and if described by an agency in the United States it is not. 
This seems like a picky difference to me. What if described by an agency in 
Canada? What about Australia?

Well, I think that's it. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.


At 09:16 AM 4/23/2007, you wrote:
>Hello fellow PCC advocates,
>Just a friendly reminder, if you intend to comment, May 14 -- Public 
>comments on Chapter 3 of RDA from web form due
>Separate from this, I will summarize any comments on behalf of PCC sent to 
>me as liaison to CC:DA by the following week of May 18.
>Best regards,
>Peter Fletcher, PCC Liaison to CC:DA
>Peter V. Fletcher
>Serials & Electronic Resources Catalog Librarian, Bibliographer for 
>Germanic/Slavic, Senior Consulting Area Technical Liaison
>Howard-Tilton Memorial Library
>Tulane University
>New Orleans, LA 70118
>(504) 862-8582