Print

Print


Thanks, Judy and Robert, for the clarifications.

Mary L. Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio Texas 78265
1-800-531-7678
[log in to unmask]
www.marcive.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kuhagen, Judith
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 3:19 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes 
> (Clarification on Decision 2)
> 
> Clarification about what is when:
> 
> During the US RDA Test, the guidelines in the document "US 
> RDA Test Policy for the Extra Set: Use of Existing Authority 
> and Bibliographic Records" apply.  When creating a new 
> name/title or a new higher body/subordinate body NAR, use the 
> RDA form for the name or the higher body even if the RDA form 
> is represented only in the 7XX field of an AACR2 record.  
> Why?  Because the Coordinating Committee wanted pure RDA 
> access points in the bibliographic records.
> 
> After the Test is over (what the PoCo decision addresses), 
> John's explanation applies.  Why?  Because PoCo wants all 
> access points in RDA records to be controlled by 1XX in 
> authority records.
> 
> Judy K.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mary Mastraccio
> Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2010 11:29 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Policy Committee meeting outcomes (Clarification 
> on Decision 2)
> 
> John,
> 
> Your explanation sounds correct/best to me but that is not 
> what happened in this situation
> 
> See n  81079488   100 0   $aShenute,$dca. 348-466 
>     no2010160564  100 0   $aShenute,$dapproximately 
> 348-466.$tWorks.$kSelections.$lEnglish.$f1993
> 
> 
> When I brought this to LC's attention--my understanding of 
> the RDA test rules were that the new record should still 
> follow the established form in the 1xx--I was told:
> 
> [LC COMMENT:]  In the document "US RDA Test Policy for the 
> Extra Set: Use of Existing Authority and Bibliographic 
> Records" 
> (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/admindoc1.doc) this 
> situation is Scenario 1, section 2:   When the entity 
> represented by the AACR2 form in the 1XX in the authority 
> record is needed as ***part of an authorized access point*** 
> in the bibliographic record (e.g., the person in a name/title 
> access point, the higher body in a body/subordinate body 
> access point, the local place as a qualifier in a conference 
> access point) ....
> 
> It would be OK if someone added an AACR2 form in a 7XX field 
> in the new RDA compound authority record, but we weren't 
> requiring people to do that.  As I recall, the coordinating 
> committee didn't want to force people to formulate both an 
> RDA and AACR2 form for the new entity (the time spent was 
> already skewed against RDA for having to record the form in 
> the AACR2 record for the name-only record).
> ---
> 
> Things are still not clear to even the testers, let alone 
> everyone else.
> 
> Mary L. Mastraccio, MLS
> Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
> MARCIVE, Inc.
> San Antonio Texas 78265
> 1-800-531-7678
> [log in to unmask]
> www.marcive.com 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Riemer, John
> > Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2010 12:30 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes 
> > (Clarification on Decision 2)
> > 
> > Bob,
> >    
> > The 1XX forms from existing AACR2 authority records are to 
> be used in 
> > bibliographic records.  This is true even when the
> > AACR2 form represents a "building block" in a new heading being 
> > formulated.  RDA forms may be added to 7XX fields in the authority 
> > records, particularly when the heading form would be different.
> > Examples:
> > 
> > 
> > AACR2 authority record
> > 
> > 100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev.
> > 700 14 $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman)
> > 
> > New heading needed for cataloging
> > 
> > 100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev. $t Poems 700 14 $a Brown, 
> George $c 
> > (Clergyman). $t Poems
> > 
> > 
> > AACR2 authority record
> > 
> > 110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London 710 24 $a Royal 
> > College of Physicians (London, England)
> > 
> > New heading needed for cataloging
> > 
> > 110 2_ $a Royal College of Physicians of London. $b Tobacco 
> Advisory 
> > Group 710 24 $a Royal College of Physicians (London, England). $b 
> > Tobacco Advisory Group
> > 
> > 
> > The Policy Committee has also slightly revised the final portion of 
> > Decision 2:
> > 
> > 2. After the test period ends in Dec. 2010, PCC members may 
> continue 
> > to use the RDA testing guidelines from Jan. 2 until further notice, 
> > with the exception that already-established
> > AACR2 heading forms should be used in bibliographic records. 
> > This decision will be reevaluated at the time an implementation 
> > decision is made.
> > 
> >    John
> > 
> > John Riemer
> > Head, UCLA Library Cataloging & Metadata Center Kinross South 11020 
> > Kinross Avenue Box 957230 (campus mail code 723011) Los Angeles, CA 
> > 90095-7230
> > +1 310.825.2901 voice
> > +1 310.794.9357 fax
> > [log in to unmask]
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 2:04 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] Policy Committee meeting outcomes
> > 
> > Decision 2 needs a bit of clarification, perhaps:
> > 
> > "2. After the test period ends in Dec. 2010, PCC members 
> may continue 
> > to use the RDA testing guidelines from Jan. 2 until further notice, 
> > with the exception that already-established
> > AACR2 heading forms should be used in bibliographic records. 
> > This decision will be reevaluated in April 2011."
> > 
> > A. I assume this means we will continue to add 7XX fields to the 
> > authority records for the RDA form, which may differ from the AACR2 
> > form in the 1XX field, but we will use the 1XX form in the 
> bib record.
> > 
> > B. What about brand new RDA authority records related to existing
> > AACR2 authority forms? Presumably we are to use the RDA form in the 
> > 1XX of those records (and in the RDA bib record), but what if that 
> > form differs from the AACR2 form on the related authority 
> record? E.g.
> > (example from the "testing
> > guidelines"):
> > 
> > AACR2 authority record
> > 
> > 100 1_ $a Brown, George, $c Rev.
> > 700 14 $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman)
> > 
> > New RDA authority record
> > 
> > 100 1_ $a Brown, George $c (Clergyman). $t Poems
> > 
> > Bob
> > 
> > Robert L. Maxwell
> > Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept.
> > 6728 Harold B. Lee Library
> > Brigham Young University
> > Provo, UT 84602
> > (801)422-5568
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging 
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Les Hawkins
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 1:49 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Policy Committee meeting outcomes
> > 
> > PCC Colleagues,
> > 
> > The PCC Policy Committee (PoCo) met November 4-5, 2010 for 
> its annual 
> > meeting. Decisions and action items from the meeting are 
> available and 
> > posted on the PCC web site:
> > http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/PCC-Actions.html
> > 
> > Les Hawkins
> > CONSER Coordinator
> > Library of Congress
> > [log in to unmask]
> > 
>