RDA Review of Module 31Areas of Module 31 Requiring

During the review of Module 31, there was only one new issue that surfaced no new issues surfaced (ie, not already considered in PCC discussion) that would affect PCC implementation of RDA. For an online serial or integrating resource that does not use a paged format (such as a web site), RDA specifies "embedded metadata" as the source for the title. Taking the title from embedded metadata rather than the title screen or other title presentation on a home page can make a significant difference for cataloging online resources and e-serials in particular given that:

  • the loss of traditional descriptive sources (eg, title page, cover) results in a variety of non-standard presentations, and
  • the choice of title can make a significant difference in decisions about successive entry and major/minor changes…the use of cataloger judgment in interpreting publisher intent may reduce unnecessary successive records

We hope that PCC reviews this specific consideration for non-page formatted internet online resources to see whether embedded metadata really serves as the best, most reliable source for title transcription.

In addition, the Task Force identified other potential The following list of items were identified as possible changes to Module 31 that will need to be examined upon implementation of RDA for bibliographic records:.

Throughout the entire document

  • Use RDA terminology when appropriate

Confirm CSR practice (at the time of implementation) is represented throughoutin Module 31

  • Review examples to make sure they are acceptable within the RDA framework

Review examples to make sure they are acceptable within the RDA framework

3.2 MAP/Table

  • Check on the implementation status of the recommendations from the CONSER Standard Record RDA Core Elements Task Group regarding:
  • 1XX/240 vs 7XX
  • 130/240
  • 260 $c
  • 245 $c

31.2.3 Single Record Approach

  • Clarify that 33X fields contain elements only for the textual materials. (per 2011 CONSER OpCO meeting outcome)
  • Re-evaluate practices related to the single-record approach which may be considered incompatible with RDA, e.g., addition of access points that pertain only to the only to the online manifestation but that appear in the record for the print as 740 #0 or 7XX #0 entries with no qualifying information.
  • “Guidelines for Record Creation and Record Consolidation: Provider-Neutral Record”: Would need to be re-considered in light of the “Report of the PCC Task Group on RDA and the Provider-Neutral Model for Monographs”

[mentioned in 3.2, so may not be necessary here: Re-evaluate practices related to the separate-record approach which may be considered incompatible with RDA, e.g., addition of an authorized access point for the original manifestation not identified as such (730 field)]

31.2.3 “Guidelines for Record Creation and Record Consolidation: Provider-Neutral Record”: Would need to be re-considered in light of the “Report of the PCC Task Group on RDA and the Provider-Neutral Model for Monographs”

31.4 (Main and Added Entries) and 31.16 (Linking Relationships)

  • Add relationship designators to related entities

31.6.2 (General Material Designation) and 31.12 (Physical Description)

When 33X fields implemented, edit to account for current practice