OZ 2014/2

M T 77 ORGANIZACIJA ZNANJA 2014, LETN. 19, ZV. 2 The current "OCLC RDA Policy Statement," which has been in effect since RDADay One, March 31, 2013, is located at http://www.oclc.org/en-US/rda/new-policy.html. But it has a history that reaches back through the RDA tes- ting period in 2010, and is deeply informed by the release of the Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee (2011) in June 2011 and espe- cially the "Report of the PCC Post-Implementation Hybrid Bibliographic Records Guidelines Task Group" (2012) in October 2012. OCLC cooperative members contributing original cataloging are NOT required to submit RDA re- cords now or at any time in the foreseeable future. Instituti- ons are free to continue cataloging according to AACR2. During early 2012, OCLC made widely available for comment a discussion paper, "Incorporating RDA Practi- ces into WorldCat" (http://www.oclc.org/en-US/rda/ discussion.html ), which laid out potential policies and actions regarding how RDA data and practices might be incorporated more fully into WorldCat. Among the many topics covered were: upgrading records done under older cataloging rules, adding RDA elements to non-RDA re- cords, potential automated conversions of records. After the comment period (which lasted from February 15 through April 15, 2012), we thoroughly reviewed users' suggestions and comments and tried to determine what policies would work best both for the cataloging commu- nity and for library users. We also kept in mind the dual roles of WorldCat as a catalog and WorldCat as a reposi- tory of bibliographic data. The work of Program for Co- operative Cataloging (PCC) RDA task groups also helped to inform these most important discussions. The resulting "OCLC RDA Policy Statement" was based on all of this, including the overwhelmingly positive and thoughtful comments that we have received from members of the OCLC cooperative. More than 40 substantive and usable comments and suggestions came to OCLC during the two-month comment period. By far, the most controversial idea in the OCLC discus- sion paper related to the General Material Designation (GMD). We decided to follow the PCC Hybrid Bibliog- raphic Records report. GMDs will remain in non-RDA records until March 31, 2016, that is, for three years following RDA Day One. GMDs should be removed from records being recataloged and recoded to RDA and should not be included in any RDA record; 33X fields should be used instead. Regarding original cataloging, when adding a new record unique to WorldCat, the records may be coded for RDA (Desc: i or c, 040 subfield $e rda), AACR2 (Desc: a), or any other recognized cataloging code. When creating a new record with English as the Language of Cataloging, consult the LC/NACO Authority File and use forms of access points found there, regardless of whether they are coded for RDA. The LC/NACO file will continue to be the source of authorized name and title access points for all records cataloged in English in WorldCat. OCLC asks catalogers to control all controllable headings to facilitate the updating of headings as authority records are updated to conform to RDA. For copy cataloging, libraries may choose to use existing records as is or locally edit them as needed. Catalogers are not required to upgrade master re- cords to change them from non-RDA codes to RDA. Do not change RDA master records to conform to an earlier cataloging code. With the goals of comprehensibility and consistency for the end user in mind, OCLC has been making some of the following changes to existing bibliographic records with a Language of Cataloging of English (040 subfield $b eng) when possible and appropriate: • Adding 336, 337, and 338 fields (Content/Media/Car- rier Type). • Spelling out non-transcribed abbreviations in 255, 300, 500, 504, and other fields. – p. → pages. – ill. → illustrations. • Converting Latin abbreviations to English equivalents in 245, 260, and other fields. – [s.l.] → [place of publication not identified]. – [s.n.] → [publisher not identified]. – ca. → approximately. • Converting dissertation notes in 502 field to multiple subfields. • Updating headings (Authorized Access Points) in accordance with RDA. All of these Hybrid Record policies are in accord with the comments and suggestions of members of the OCLC cooperative from the RDA discussion paper, and the re- commendations of the two task groups of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) that studied the issue: the PCC Task Group on Hybrid Bibliographic Records (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20Task%20 groups%20and%20charges/Hybrid-Report-Sept-2011. pdf) for the interim period between the RDA Test in 2010 and RDA Day One in March 2013 and the PCC Post-Im- plementation Hybrid Bibliographic Records Guidelines Task Group (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20 Task%20groups%20and%20charges/PCC-Hybrid-Bib- Rec-Guidelines-TG-Report.docx) for after RDA Day One. These two reports were issued in September 2011 and October 2012, respectively. In addition to allowing users to make the same sorts of additions of RDA elements to non-RDA records that OCLC is doing in an automated fashion (such as spelling Jay Weitz: REACHING DECISIONS AND ADJUSTING – RDA AND OCLC