[DCRM-L] more PCC rare materials BSR/CSR questions (RDA 2.9, 2.10, 2.11)

[Fell, Todd]

I agree with Francis.

Todd

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Lapka, Francis
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 8:53 AM
To: DCRM Users' Group
Subject: Re: [DCRM-L] more PCC rare materials BSR/CSR questions (RDA 2.9, 2.10, 2.11)

I support Manon’s suggestion that 2.9 (distribution) and 2.10 (manufacture) should be “PCC Core” for rare materials.

For 2.11 (copyright date), my preference is for “PCC recommended.”



From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu<mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu> [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Manon Theroux
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 1:31 PM
To: DCRM Revision Group List
Subject: [DCRM-L] more PCC rare materials BSR/CSR questions (RDA 2.9, 2.10, 2.11)

At the RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee (BSC) meeting at ALA Midwinter, chair Nina Schneider reported on my behalf that the PCC Standing Committee on Standards had recently completed (well, almost completed) a project to convert the instructions in the "Notes" column of the BIBCO RDA Standard Record (BSR) and CONSER RDA Standard Record (CSR) to LC-PCC Policy Statements. These were published in the February update to the RDA Toolkit. Many of these instructions were DCRM-related and had been originally added with BSC approval.
The project left a few issues unresolved. Earlier this week, Nina forwarded to this list some of the outstanding questions on RDA 1.8 that I sent her on behalf of the SCS. With her permission I am sending some additional questions that have come up since then. Please feel free to express your opinions, especially those of you who are currently creating bib records coded PCC in 042 and RDA/DCRM in 040.
RDA 2.9, 2.10, and 2.11 (aka the "Cascading vortext of doom")

In RDA, the "core if" conditional requirements for the distribution, manufacture, and copyright elements will be removed as part of the April update. There will no longer be a requirement to include these elements when elements of publication are not available. See:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-ALA-29-rev-Sec-final.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rda-2Djsc.org_docs_6JSC-2DALA-2D29-2Drev-2DSec-2Dfinal.pdf&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=9tSUpaOGvPS2e7-W4Kt-TS4bswvmlryXqPjuhPBmJKg&s=ZIyBZ9Q0BM1kXlVtzNhj9czAA4-egcAVet5PuPegtFM&e=>

Because these elements are no longer RDA Core, I think they will need to be removed from the BSR/CSR unless they are given a new status of "PCC Core" or "PCC Recommended".

Questions: Should these elements be considered "PCC Core" for rare materials now that they are no longer "RDA Core"? I think the answer is "yes" for 2.9 (distributor) and 2.10 (manufacture) - if the statements appear on the resource and are appropriate for transcription according to DCRM rules, then we want catalogers to transcribe them. Do you agree?

I'm less sure about 2.11 (copyright date). DCRM says not to transcribe copyright date as publication date, but has the option to give the copyright date in a note (either a quoted note or a general note). However, DCRM is an AACR2-based standard, and thus didn't have RDA's stand-alone "copyright date" element to contend with. I think there are 3 possible scenarios for 2.11 in the BSR/CSR (the PCC PS would also be adjusted as needed):

- delete 2.11 from the BSR/CSR - recording copyright date would entirely be left to cataloger judgment
- make 2.11 "PCC Core" (always record the date in 264 2nd indicator 4 if present; you would also have the option to make a note in addition, of course)
- make 2.11 "PCC Recommended" (recording the date is recommended but not strictly required)
The BSR and CSR are here:
http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/bibco/documents/PCC-RDA-BSR.pdf<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.loc.gov_aba_pcc_bibco_documents_PCC-2DRDA-2DBSR.pdf&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=9tSUpaOGvPS2e7-W4Kt-TS4bswvmlryXqPjuhPBmJKg&s=tDM_7bOCEe7f9yvKo1jqoc6fced6eX5LvMdfQGdXjZY&e=>
http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/conser/documents/CONSER-RDA-CSR.doc<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.loc.gov_aba_pcc_conser_documents_CONSER-2DRDA-2DCSR.doc&d=AwMFaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=9tSUpaOGvPS2e7-W4Kt-TS4bswvmlryXqPjuhPBmJKg&s=HZfi8owrfddhFyvkC6HArfgFBJOW2yK7LQc7hg2iJoA&e=>

Thanks,
Manon
--
Manon Théroux
Head of Technical Services
U.S. Senate Library
SR-B15 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC  20510-7112



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150312/9ee3294c/attachment-0001.html>