[log in to unmask]">

With the exception of non-roman script cataloging, our library cataloging is performed in our local system and batch exported to OCLC. (Exporting of new cataloging to OCLC has been on hiatus while we complete our reconciliation project)  For copy cataloging, records are downloaded from OCLC, and if the record has 040 $e rda,  the copy cataloger is expected to leave it as is, and these records will be part of the batch export to OCLC.  We will be asking our authority control vendor (Backstage) to include authority records with 040 $e rda  when a new heading on a bibliographic record processed by them matches the 1xx of the authority record. When we create original, non-copy cataloging records in our system and have occasion to assign a heading  coded as rda in the authority record, I am assuming we will use the rda heading in the bibliographic record even though the bib record will be coded as AACR2.  We are not participating in the RDA testing, so we would not expect to catalog the entire record as RDA because we had to use a heading coded as rda.* 


So, the question is, can a bibliographic record cataloged as AACR2  be coded as pcc if one or more headings in the record are coded as rda in the corresponding authority record(s)  (assuming all the other elements follow pcc protocols)?


*The OCLC guidelines do not seem to address this situation explicitly. As already noted, our local policy at this time  is not to modify catalog records coded as rda, even if this results in split files locally. I think at this point the number of split files caused by death dates will be causing more disruption than RDA/AACR2 splits for some time to come.


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]