Decisions Table from

SCT RDA Records Task Group Report

April 11, 2012

Updated April 16, 2012

Updated with current status August 19, 2012

Recommendation / PoCo Comments / Next Steps / Timetable/Priority / Status Summer 2012
1. Show unauthorized RDA form or AACR2 forms? / PoCo supported the idea that this RDA record set should reflect the RDA forms of name (when readily available). It was noted that examples that contained AACR2 forms of name would not “age well.” PCC wants to be “forward looking” (including in records used as examples). / The TG will make sure that RDA headings, when readily available, are contained in this record set. / Ideally, all record adjustments would take place following the OpCo meeting, during the month of May 2012, allowing for the record set to be posted and announced in June 2012. / As of August 2012: Done.
2. Use newly approved but not yet implemented MARC fields?
(See related item below from BSR Decision Table) / PoCo was confused by the wording of the survey question. The group would like to see 264 fields added to this record set, even if it means making up data. The group did not think it was necessary to add the 34x fields to the example records. / The TG will construct 264 fields and add them to the records. Guidelines to help them do so might be needed for certain categories (e.g., dissertations). / See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done.
3. Provision of surrogates? / PoCo agreed that more surrogates would be helpful, and suggested that the community would likely help with providing them. / Assign the collection of surrogates to SCT. / See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done. Although Chamya and Paul do not want to reconvene the original TG to have members collect surrogates, they will post a request to the broader PCC community via the CLW site, along with the record examples themselves.
4. Provision of authority records? / PoCo supported as large and diverse a set of supporting authority records as is possible. There was some discussion of linking the two sets of authority record examples. / This could be raised in the OpCo discussion. We could ask for recommendations on what additional types of NARs would be useful (and for that matter, additional bibs). / See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done.
5. RDA-given vs. Cataloger-supplied relator terms / PoCo supports the idea of adhering to RDA as closely as possible, but realizes the need for cataloger-provided terms not found in Appendix J. Examples should be provided (and labeled as such) in this record set. / The TG will review the records to assure that there are sufficient examples of cataloger-provided terms. / See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done.
6. Is the organization of the record examples appropriate? / PoCo believes that these records will be extremely useful in the personal learning process for catalogers. These records need to be organized so that catalogers can easily find what they need.
PoCo did not mandate any re-organizing, however if the TG finds an alternative arrangement that they believe will work better they are free to do so. / None, unless the TG wants to make some changes. / See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done.
7. Future enhancements to the records? / Although undoubtedly valuable, PoCo has some concerns about moving ahead with enhancements to the records now as outlined in the report. The group would prefer to see the feedback from actual use of the records before developing an enhancement (or maintenance) process. /
  • The TG report will be discussed at OpCo, particularly #4 above.
  • PoCo will charge the SCT to collect and link surrogates.
  • The TG will make the adjustments to the records noted above, and will prepare a general introduction to help catalogers understand how the records were prepared, and that some data is “made up.”
  • With the assistance (if needed) from SCT and the Secretariat, the TG will design some kind of feedback mechanism so that users can make suggestions and/or identify issues. The records will be posted on the CLW site and announced to PCCLIST.
  • The CETM will review the site 4 months after its public release and make recommendations to PoCo for next steps.
/ See #1 above. / As of August 2012: Done.