I think it's always tempting to go back for the sake of consistency but if you go down that route you won't make much progress in terms of new cataloguing. That is why I always tell my team to resist the temptation and only go over old ground to correct mistakes rather than to update in order to conform to the new standard.
________________________________________
From: CIG E-Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Matthew Baalham <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 15 April 2015 15:34
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] RDA
It has been interesting to read of some people using RDA already for rare books. The situation I am in is that the catalogue I am working on creating has been about 10 years in the making and has a good consistency of abiding by DCRM rules. Although it would be easier to adjust authority entries such as changing 'fl.' to 'active' etc., it would be much harder to justify modifying all of the free text entries in the 27,000 records to date. My primary purpose is to press on with new cataloguing, not going back over old ground. Have people reached different conclusions?
|