Again, there’s only 2 of us so we might be different to a bigger team… I think we’ve just used our own judgement – if there’s been something new or odd that either of us come across we either make the decision ourselves or ask each other. Maybe we should write down a few more of our decisions though! I guess given we don’t (as yet) have strict policies on exactly when we eg: add a 505 field, maybe it’s a related issue.

Additionally as we don’t export to any union catalogues like RLUK (our items are listed in the serch25 catalogue but it’s not an export per se), it’s maybe less of a concern?

Katrina

Apart from the issue of applying options and alternatives, I’d like to invite your experiences of how consistently RDA is being applied by cataloguers as a last topic for this morning.

At the British Library, we have emphasized that there is scope for cataloguer judgement in certain circumstances. For example, if a large number of authors are listed in a statement of responsibility, then it is acceptable to only provide the first with an access point if, to do otherwise, could be considered onerous.

Do cataloguers appear to be using their discretion in similar ways, or has application been found to vary?

Thurstan  

This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System.