PCC RDA POST-IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES

1. PCC RDA POST-IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES Highlights of the Task Group Report PCC Participants Meeting January 27, 2013

2. Task Group Members • Gene Dickerson, Chair • Shana McDanold • Ana Cristan • Cynthia Whitacre • Les Hawkins • Georgia Fujikawa • Wanda Gunther • Nate Cothran

3. Scope of Guidelines • Textual monographs and textual serials • Another report exists for integrating resources • Other group(s) would create guidelines for non-textual resources and other specialized resources (rare books) • Not possible to develop guidelines for non-textual resources in time allotted • Authority control not within purview

4. Methodology • Build on the work of the TG Report on Interim Guidelines • Follow format of TG Group on Interim Guidelines and include table for monographs and serials that would provide practical guidance to catalogers

5. Philosophy • Do no harm! • Flexibility • PCC member libraries decide how many, if any, changes made to pre-RDA records • Manual editing and/or machine manipulation • PCC member libraries decide whether to re-describe to RDA • Guidelines could also be applied by non-PCC member (OCLC, Sky River members)

6. More philosophy • Enhancing pre-RDA records in “RDA style” supports end user tasks: find, identify, select • Eliminate ambiguity of abbreviations • Additional text for retrieval • Statement of responsibility • Publisher name

7. Lots of changes an RDA record • Not desirable to create an RDA record either via manual changes or machine manipulation due to differences RDA vs. pre-RDA standards • Even if all possible changes described in the guides are made, still not an RDA record • In order to make an RDA record, describe or re-describe using RDA guidelines with access to the resource being described (or a surrogate)

8. First do no harm! • Retain AACR2 conventions and RDA conventions if accurate • No editing wars! • Don’t recode record as RDA unless you’re re-describing following RDA guidelines (i.e. don’t change Desc code or add 040 $e rda)

9. Special considerations: GMD and 336, 337, 338 fields • OK to add 336, 337, 338 fields • Do NOT remove GMD $h from 245 field • Retain GMD for a period of 3 years to allow libraries to work with vendors to develop ways to use 336,337, 338 fields identification of resources instead of GMD • Concern of many OCLC, Sky River members, especially public libraries

10. Some examples of editing: monographs • Statement of responsibility 245 $c • This may be left as is; OR • May add or edit statements of responsibility to reflect elements not transcribed previously. Under AACR2, statement(s) of responsibility may not name more than 3 entities of the same type [3 editors, 3 authors, 3 illustrators, 3 translators, etc.] and may only be transcribed from certain sources. “[et al.]” is used if truncating a statement of responsibility. Per the RDA LC/PCC policy statement on the optional omission of names in the statement of responsibility, generally do not omit names in the statement of responsibility. Therefore, it is OK to add additional names to the statement of responsibility in non-RDA records in order to provide keyword access to this data, assuming that the cataloger has access to the resource or an acceptable surrogate. • Making additional access points is a local decision

11. Some examples of editing: monographs • May convert 260 field to 264 field(s) if desired or add a 264 field as needed. • For additional guidance on the 260/264 fields, see PCC guidelines for the 264 field. • You may change Latin abbreviations "S.l." or "s.n." to their spelled out RDA equivalents "Place of publication not identified" and "publisher not identified". It is ok to leave them in the record. These are prescribed Latin abbreviations in AACR2.

12. Some examples of editing: serials • Physical description (300 field) • OK to add if not present. Following CONSER RDA core element guidelines. • Edit when closing record to indicate number of bibliographic volumes, if information is known

13. Some examples of editing: serials • 538 field • OK to retain in record. Prefer adding 336, 337, and 338 fields instead of adding 538 field(s) for mode of access.

14. Machine manipulation • Final report contains many examples of candidates for machine manipulation • May be more desirable to do batch machine manipulations instead of manual editing record by record • Specs would be needed • If you do machine conversion, publicize what you’re doing and your specs

15. Other issues: single record approach • PCC decision that single record approach is an acceptable exception to RDA guidelines • Not addressed explicitly in final report but guidelines do not preclude single record approach • 856 field Feel free to add or modify as needed

16. Other issues: latest entry cataloging • Local decision to retain latest entry records or re-describe using successive entry records • If you re-describe, use AACR2 or RDA, depending on which guidelines member library is following (no day one for RDA bibliographic records for PCC members) • OK to edit latest entry records following guidelines in the final report • See existing CONSER documentation