Q7: Do you know the procedures for making proposals for the development of RDA, and have you used them? No. But it is now on my list of things to get to grips with.

Q8: What use do you make of user contributed content in the RDA Toolkit, such as workflows, mappings and policy statements? I have found LC policy statements most useful. We don't always follow them but they give us a starting point to help us decide on application issues. The policy statement for art catalogues was particularly helpful and has it informed a couple of our own policies.

Q9: What other standards does your agency use to supplement RDA for specialist materials? None so far.

Q10: Changes included in the April update relaxed some of the constraints on construction of authorized access points for persons.  How far should RDA prescribe the construction of authorised access points? If the A in RDA is about authorised access points shouldn't it prescribe their construction to the same extent that it prescribes the description of resources?

Q11: What is the value of conventional collective titles? Hard to say without real RDA LMS and/or discovery tools. We're back to the problem of not being sure of the impact of some of our policy decisions because we're still working with bibliographic and authority records and we're still using MARC.

Q12: The consolidation of the FRBR, FRAD and FRSAD models may introduce new entities for place and timespan to RDA.  Consequently places and timespans could be identified and related in similar ways to Persons Families and Corporate Bodies.  What do you think would be the benefits of, or barriers to implementation? Presumably this would eventually replace LCSH? If so, we're talking about another huge shift on a par with the move from AACR2 to RDA. I also think it may be much harder to contain places and timespans within single entitles because they're not as stable and defined as persons, families and corporate bodies.