<font><font face="georgia,serif">Innocent (i.e. uninformed) question: Is the list of terms in C.5 consciously and prescriptively limited vis-à-vis our existing vocabulary? Or do the many remaining terms await the writing of scope notes to make them acceptable under PCC guidelines?</font></font><div>
<font><font face="georgia,serif"><br clear="all"></font></font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD NOBLE : RARE BOOKS CATALOGER : JOHN HAY LIBRARY : BROWN UNIVERSITY<br>PROVIDENCE, RI 02912 : 401-863-1187/FAX 863-3384 : <a href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU" target="_blank">RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU</a> </font></div>
<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Auyong, Dorothy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dauyong@huntington.org" target="_blank">dauyong@huntington.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Worth perusing and adding the 2 cents from the Rare Books Community I think.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Dorothy Auyong</span><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Principal Rare Book Cataloger</span><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Huntington Library</span><span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><a href="mailto:dauyong@huntington.org" target="_blank"><span>dauyong@huntington.org</span></a></span><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:<a href="mailto:PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV" target="_blank">PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Philip Schreur<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, December 04, 2012 11:48 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV" target="_blank">PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [PCCLIST] Relationship Designator TG Report Open for Comment<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">All,<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">I am extremely pleased to announce that the final report of the Relationship Designator Task Group is now available on the PCC website:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Relationship Designator TG Report <br> <a href="http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20Task%20groups%20and%20charges/PCC-Relat-Desig-TG-report.rtf" target="_blank">http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20Task%20groups%20and%20charges/PCC-Relat-Desig-TG-report.rtf</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">The group was chaired by Naun Chew and was asked to provide a policy statement and guidelines for providing relationship designators in PCC RDA bibliographic records. In particular, they were asked to:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in">1. Prepare a policy recommendation and supporting PCC guidelines to describe when and how to provide relationship designators in bibliographic records, and for any related changes in authority records.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in">2. Provide recommendations and guidance on what PCC catalogers should do when a needed term is not listed in the applicable RDA appendix.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in">3. Frame the guidelines within a definition and description of the problem so that both the concept and the implementation details will be understood by the PCC and broader professional community<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:.5in">4. Recommend an implementation strategy and timetable for these guidelines.<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>The report has made a number of excellent recommendations. Please read the document carefully, we are very much interested in your comments. The comment period will be open until the end of this month (Dec. 31st) and comments can be directed to SurveyMonkey:<a href="https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TZ6DZX5" target="_blank"> https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/TZ6DZX5</a>. All the best.<br>
<br>Philip<br><u></u><br><u></u><u></u><u></u></span></p><pre>-- <u></u><u></u></pre><pre>Philip E. Schreur<u></u><u></u></pre><pre>Head, Metadata Department<u></u><u></u></pre><pre>Chair, Program for Cooperative Cataloging<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>Stanford University<u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="tel:650-723-2454" value="+16507232454" target="_blank">650-723-2454</a><u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="tel:650-725-1120" value="+16507251120" target="_blank">650-725-1120</a> (fax)<u></u><u></u></pre>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>