Hi, Liping.


I don’t think that it’s necessary to convert the OCLC records to RDA.  The examples in the CCM are being used to illustrate the concepts being discussed.  There’s no guarantee that they are going to match exactly existing OCLC records just as there wasn’t in the AACR2 version of the CCM.  My preference is to see CONSER catalogers spend time on original cataloging or on authenticating copy rather than recataloging serials that already have CONSER records.  Therefore, I think it’s acceptable to convert the AACR2 examples from the AACR2 version of the CCM to RDA, if practical.  It’s also acceptable to add new examples that comply with the RDA guidelines.  I agree that you should do whatever is easier.  If recataloging proves to be the path of least resistance, then go for it, but I don’t think that one of the goals of the CCM revision should be to recatalog serials just to have RDA examples.





Eugene Dickerson
Lead Librarian for Cataloging
Ralph J. Bunche Library
U.S. Dept. of State
2201 C Street NW, Rm. 2438
Washington, DC 20520
(202) 647-2191 voice
(202) 647-0203 fax
[log in to unmask]
Ready to take your research skills to the next level?
Bunche Library FullSearch
Try it - let us know if you like it. [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Liping Song
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 2:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCTG1] CCM 31 Record Exmaples

Hi all,

Let me first apologize for bringing up  an already discussed topic! I'm revising the record examples in CCM31.20 and would like to hear your opinions on whether you think we should
1) use the existing examples and convert them to RDA in OCLC and use in CCM
2) use the existing examples and convert them to RDA in CCM only
3) come up with new examples already in RDA (which we all have some ready)
4) do either 1) or 3) , whichever makes better sense and/or easier ...

There're four examples, 1. born digital e-serial, 2. provider-neutral, 3. single-record approach, 4. e-version with an earlier title. Are there any other cases we should include?

Thanks in advance!


Liping Song, MA, MTS, MLIS
Metadata Services Librarian
Health Sciences Library System
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15261
[log in to unmask]


This email is UNCLASSIFIED.