PCC catalogers creating RDA bibliographic records during the Post-RDA Test period: 1) Please take note of the two conflict situations described below and the recommended resolution 2) These situations will be added to the PCC RDA FAQ (FAQ 3.7) (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/PCC-RDA-FAQ.html) 3) Please pardon duplication of this message on other lists The PCC Post RDA Test Guidelines (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/PCC-Post-RDA-Test.html) require PCC catalogers creating RDA bibliographic records to use either RDA or AACR2 authorized forms of names and titles in those records - to follow what is authorized in the LC/NAF. The guidelines also prohibit the creation of "hybrid" authority records: "Do not create hybrid AACR2/RDA authorized access points in establishing new headings or in making additions to existing headings. Follow one cataloging code or the other in establishing authorized access points. Catalogers making additions to AACR2 headings or making new headings based on existing AACR2 records will use AACR2 rules and appropriate LCRIs. Catalogers making additions to RDA headings or making new headings based on existing RDA records will use RDA instructions." LC's Policy and Standards Division (PSD) and LC's Cooperative Program Section (Coop) have recently encountered two situations in which the provisions in the PCC Post RDA Test Guidelines are in conflict. The following examples illustrate how LC proposes to follow the PCC guidelines not to create hybrid NARs in these two situations. Until PCC can discuss this further, and in the interest of consistency, the Coop Section requests that PCC RDA catalogers also follow LC's proposal, and temporarily refrain from creating authority records in the following two situations: 1) Works/Selections a) RDA bibliographic record access points: 100 1 $a Creator. 240 10 $a Works. $k Selections. $f 2009 or 700 12 $a Creator. $t Works. $k Selections. $f 2009. b) Authority record for creator is coded AACR2. c) According to PCC Post RDA Test Guidelines, AACR2 rules need to be used to create expression authority records; however, the AACR2 form conflicts with the RDA form: AACR2: $a Creator. $t Selections. $f 2009 RDA: $a Creator. $t Works. $k Selections. $f 2009 In this situation, Coop requests that RDA catalogers use an RDA access point with "Works. Selections" as the preferred title in the RDA bibliographic record, as noted in a) above, but do not create an authority record. The form of name for the creator should be the form represented by the authority record in the LC/NAF. Once proposed recoding of AACR2 authority records to RDA takes place, the RDA authority record will be created. (See the Final report<http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/Report%20of%20the%20Task%20Group%20on%20AACR2%20&%20RDA%20Acceptable%20Headings-1.docx> of the PCC Task Group on AACR2 & RDA Acceptable Heading Categories). This will assure the LC/NAF remains free of hybrid authorized access points for this situation. 2) Multiple Language Expressions in LC/NAF as AACR2 form a) RDA bibliographic record access points: 700 12 $a Creator. $t Work. $l Language 1. 700 12 $a Same creator. $t Same work. $l Language 2. or 730 02 $a Work. $l Language 1. 730 02 $a Same work. $l Language 2. b) Authority record for creator is coded AACR2. c) AACR2 uniform title authority record: 100 1 $a Creator. $t Work. $l Language 1 & Language 2 In this situation, Coop requests that RDA catalogers use multiple RDA access points in the RDA bibliographic record, as noted in a) above; if separate authority records for each expression do not already exist in the LC/NAF, do not create authority records for each separate language expression. The form of name for the creator should be the form represented by the authority record in the LC/NAF. Once proposed recoding of AACR2 authority records to RDA takes place, two RDA expression authority records will be created from the one AACR2 uniform title. Please send any questions on these two situations, or on any other situations related to PCC RDA policy, to [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.