The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA completed its agenda today.

As a reminder, the agenda for the meeting, as well as copies of the documents under discussion, are available on the JSC website at

The JSC considered the remaining items in a somewhat different order from that on the published agenda.  The following notes are arranged in the order of today's meeting.


6JSC/Chair/9: Element set discussion ("Notes on", "Details of", "Source Consulted", etc.

The morning began with a discussion of this paper, with Deborah Fritz (who provided the background for the issues raised in the paper) joining the group electronically.  Deborah has developed software called RIMMF (RDA in many metadata formats) which includes templates for inputting data into RDA elements.  In the process of creating these templates, she identified what she believed were elements missing from the RDA element set.

Deborah noted that there seemed to be two categories of notes in RDA: (a) there are groups of elements and sub-elements in chapters 2 and 3 that are labeled "Notes on ..." and (b) there are instructions (mostly in chapters 3 and 7) that are labeled "Details of ...".  This distinction was explained by Tom Delsey in 2006 as (a) those that made a comment about an element, and (b) those that were a different way of recording the same attribute, i.e., free-text as opposed to a controlled term. The JSC agreed that the "Details of ..." instructions were in fact elements.  The question of whether the distinction described above is needed or whether the "Notes on ..." elements should be treated in the same way as the "Details of ..." elements is a data modeling question that will be referred to a JSC technical working group.

Deborah had also identified a group of "authority-type" elements, primarily in chapters 5 and 8, that seemed to be generally related to any of all elements in the descriptions of persons, families, corporate bodies, works, and expressions -- elements such as Source consulted and Status of identification.  The JSC noted that these elements were data-about-data (meta-metadata); the JSC had already noted the need to provide a model for the inclusion of such meta-metadata in RDA descriptions, a task that will be referred to a JSC technical group.

Unresolved vocabulary issues

The JSC has been attempting to provide definitions for terms in the RDA value vocabularies. The JSC secretary had prepared a document outlining the unresolved issues.  The JSC looked at several of these issues.
  • When the same term is used in more than one vocabulary, it will be necessary to make the labels in the Glossary unique, preferably by changing one or more of the labels or (if that fails) by adding a parenthetical qualifying term.
  • In cases where RDA has multiple vocabularies for use with different types of resources (e.g., colour, colour of still image, colour of moving image, etc.), the JSC would like to merge those vocabularies into a single vocabulary.  It was decided to do that in the case of Production method.
  • The implementation of both these decisions will be informed by lists of how similar situations are treated in the translations of RDA.


Unresolved Fast Track issues

The JSC approved about ten Fast Track proposals for inclusion in the February 2014 release of the RDA Toolkit.

Note that the deadline for submitting Fast Track proposals for the February release is November 15, 2013.


6JSC/ISBD/Discussion/1 and 2/JSC response/ISBD response

The ISBD Review Group submitted a draft revision of RDA Appendix D.1, along with some issues for discussion.  The JSC agreed:
  • to clarify the purpose of Appendix D.1.1 as stated in D.0
  • to link to the ISBD-to-RDA mapping that will shortly be published, and to create an RDA-to-ISBD mapping
  • to  develop protocols for the joint maintenance of these mappings, in collaboration with the ISBD Review Group
  • to replace the content of D.1.2 and D.1.3 with links to the consolidated ISBD, and
  • to move the content of D.1 to the Tools tab in the RDA Toolkit, so that it would be available without a subscription.

The JSC will review and update Appendix D.1 based on the draft.

6JSC/CCC/12: Revision of Appendix D regarding capitalization practice

The proposal was withdrawn.

6JSC/ALA/22: Revision of A.29, Capitalization of hyphenated compounds; changes in Chicago Manual of Style, 16th edition (2010)

The proposal was to change the capitalization of hyphenated compounds in RDA, based on revisions in the latest edition of the Chicago Manual of Style.  There was no consensus in favour of the proposal, and it was withdrawn.  Two of the specific changes (those involving headings in RDA) were approved.

6JSC/ISBD/Discussion/3: ISBD Profile in RDA: Constructing functionally interoperable core records

The ISBD Review Group submitted a draft profile comparing ISBD and RDA provisions and indicating how to construct RDA descriptions that are interoperable with ISBD.  The Group asked for comments by November 30, 2013.  Given the short timeframe, the JSC will make only a brief response.  The main point to be made is that the document should clearly indicate what version of the RDA text was used, as it was clear that it did not include the revisions published in the July 2013 release.


Any other business

The JSC completed action on a number of proposals that had required additional work during the week.  Actions arising from the meeting were assigned to JSC members or constituencies, and target dates were established.

Outcomes of the meeting

A document announcing the outcomes of the meeting will be drafted by the Secretary.  It will contain a brief description of each proposal, and a general description of the decision made.  This document should be posted on the JSC website in mid-January 2014.

After the JSC Secretary has prepared the final revision text for each proposal, she will post the text on the JSC website in a .../Sec final document.  The revisions will be published in the April release of the RDA Toolkit, which will include a "revision history" section.


In its final action, the JSC acknowledged the contributions of Barbara Tillett, whose term as JSC Chair is now completed.  Barbara has been a member of the JSC since 1994, and has been instrumental in the successful accomplishment of many of the JSC's initiatives, not least the development of RDA.

The new JSC Chair is Gordon Dunsire, formerly the CILIP representative.

The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA continued its meeting in Washington, DC.

As a reminder, the agenda for the meeting, as well as copies of the documents under discussion, are available on the JSC website at

Thursday's meeting considered the following proposals:


6JSC/BL/13: Revision of RDA 9.6

This proposal seeks to adjust the core requirements for the element Other designation associated with the person, as well as the instructions for including this element in authorized access points representing persons.  The proposal was approved, with minor wording revisions.  In addition, the JSC approved LC suggestions for revisions to (a) the lists of core elements at 0.6.4 and 8.3; and to (b) the instructions for constructing authorized access points at

6JSC/LC/23: Language of the family (10.8)

The proposal to add an element to chapter 10 for Language of the family was approved, with a number of wording changes to bring the definition and instructions for this element into alignment with those for the element Language of the corporate body (11.8).

6JSC/BL/11: Revision of RDA 11.4 and 11.13 and Glossary

This proposal seeks to extend RDA 11.4, Date associated with the corporate body, by adding an element sub-type for Period of activity of the corporate body.  The proposal was approved, with some wording changes.  It was agreed that some of the instructions for recording dates of persons ( would be added to the general instruction at Instructions are also to be added to that would allow period of activity to be added to an authorized access point.  Period of activity of the corporate body is to be a core element when needed to distinguish bodies with the same name, and therefore it was added to lists of core elements at 0.6.4 and 8.3.

6JSC/BL/12: Revision of RDA 11.7 and 11.13

This proposal seeks to modify the instructions in 11.7, Other designation associated with the corporate body; the category that is currently called "Names not conveying the idea of a corporate body" is to be renamed "Type of corporate body".  The type of corporate body is to be added to an authorized access point "if the preferred name for the body does not convey the idea of a corporate body", but the type of corporate body element may be recorded whenever that information is deemed to be useful.  The proposal was approved, with wording changes, and with changes to additional instructions (,, and Appendix E.1.2.4).

6JSC/BL/14: Revision of RDA

This proposal seeks to clarify the instruction for constructing authorized access points for a series of conferences.  The proposal was approved, with wording changes and with revisions to additional instructions ( and


6JSC/BL/10: Revision ... to eliminate use of abbreviations for places

The JSC decided not to act on the BL proposal at this time.  There are a number of unresolved issues relating to place names, and the JSC agreed with the Library of Congress that these changes should all be made and implemented at the same time.  The JSC decided to set up a JSC working group to consider issues related to places.

6JSC/DNB/2: Larger place -- revision of, etc.

The JSC decided not to act on the DNB proposal; the issues it raises about larger place will be referred to a new JSC working group on places.

The DNB also raised issues relating to the use of codes to represent places.  The JSC accepted an LC proposal to revise RDA 0.12 to make it clear that other vocabulary encoding schemes (including codes) may be used as a substitute for the names or terms resulting from applying RDA instructions.


6JSC/ALA/Discussion/2: Treatment of subjects in RDA
6JSC/Chair/8: Proposals for subject relationships

The FRBR Review Group expects to complete the reconciliation of the FR models in 2015. The JSC decided not to act on these proposals at this time, wanting their decisions to be informed by the reconciliation.  It was suggested that, as an interim measure, a proposal might be developed for a high-level relationship element in chapter 23.  ALA will be asked to consider developing such a proposal.


6JSC/ACOC/7: Compilers and editors of compilations -- amendments to RDA 20.2.1

The proposal to clarify the distinction between Compiler and Editor of compilation was approved, using wording proposed by ALA.

In response to a comment from the British Library, the JSC agreed to combine the relationship designators Editor and Editor of compilation.

6JSC/ACOC/8: Addition of the copyright holder relationship -- amendments to RDA and Appendix I

The JSC decided that copyright information remains out of scope for RDA.  ACOC withdrew the proposal.

6JSC/ALA/Discussion/3: Instructions for recording relationships

ALA has been investigating how to provide instructions for creating structured descriptions of relationships in chapters 24-28.  The discussion paper consists of a series of tentative recommendations, illustrated by a strawman proposal showing what such instructions might look like.  The proposal focused on some general instructions, and sets of specific instructions for contents notes and accompanying material.

Among other things, the responses and discussion made the following points:
  • The use of relationship designators in structured descriptions may be insufficiently flexible.
  • ALA made a tentative recommendation that a structured description should consist solely of attributes of the appropriate WEMI entity (e.g., the structured description of a related work should consist of attributes of the work entity).  There was widespread disagreement with this, as being too restrictive.  One positive suggestion from LC seems worth exploring: structured descriptions of related works and expressions might be constructed using attributes of manifestations embodying the work or expression.
  • The CILIP representative observed that a note can be machine-actionable if it is constructed from specified elements identified as such; this is more or less what ALA is thinking about.
  • On the other hand, many of the responses felt that it was not a good idea to be overly specific about the content of a structured description.

The ALA task force will review all the responses and continue to develop revision proposals.

6JSC/ALA/25: RDA Appendix K revision and expansion

ALA presented an extensive expansion of the provisional appendix of relationship designators for relationships between instances of the person, family, and corporate body entities.  The discussion concentrated on a number of general issues raised in the responses:
  • It was decided that examples belong in the instructions for the relationship elements, not in the appendix.
  • Distinct terms should be used for distinct relationships, even in they appear in different categories (e.g., student in K.2.1.1 and K.2.3).
  • After extensive discussion, it was decided that the list could include gender-specific terms.
  • ALA was advised to create a new section for relationships between one PFC (unspecified person, family, or corporate body) and another PFC.  All the relationship designators that can apply to all three entities should be moved to this section.

ALA will further develop the proposal and bring it back next year.  In the interim, the JSC agreed that Fast Track proposals could be made for any designators that are urgently needed.

6JSC/CILIP rep/3: RDF representation of RDA relationship designators: a follow-up discussion paper

The CILIP representative has presented a mass of data resulting from his analysis of the RDA relationship designators.  This data was originally extracted from the RDA Toolkit and then manipulated in a variety of ways.  Some of this manipulation is designed to accomplish tasks such as transforming the property labels by adding verb forms and creating a consistent structure for property definitions. The expectation is that this data can be loaded directly into the Open Metadata Registry as a way of creating a version of the registry that is synchronized with the Toolkit. An RDA Technical Implementation Committee will be convened; among its tasks will be making recommendations on how to load the data into the Registry and how to set up a synchronization platform that can be used to make sure that the Registry and the Toolkit are consistent.

It was noted that Appendix 3 of the paper contains complete alphabetical lists of all the terms in RDA Appendices I, J, and K.  These lists also present the full hierarchy of each term; for each there are views: bottom-up and top-down.  This appendix is freely available on the JSC website in PDF format; the URL is: 

The JSC reviewed the recommendations in the paper and assigned actions for any that required further work (including a number of referrals to the RDA Technical Implementation Committee).


The JSC will complete its agenda tomorrow, considering a number of proposals relating to RDA appendices; completing action on a number of proposals that required further work by representatives; drafting the outcomes of the meeting; and holding a final executive session.

The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA continued its meeting in Washington, DC.

As a reminder, the agenda for the meeting, as well as copies of the documents under discussion, are available on the JSC website at

Wednesday's meeting considered the following proposals:


6JSC/LC rep/4: Treatment of Choreographic Works in RDA

This discussion paper raised a number of issues relating to the treatment of choreographic works in RDA.  The JSC responded to a number of questions and offered advice to the Library of Congress in preparing a revision proposal.  The JSC generally agreed that a choreographic work should be treated as a work in RDA and that the choreographer is the creator.  They also agreed that there should be instructions for devising preferred titles for untitled works in RDA chapter 6 (preferably a set of general instructions that would apply to all untitled works).  They also expressed a preference for following general guidelines, rather than creating sections of specialized instructions for choreographic works.

The most significant discussion dealt with the nature of a choreographic work.  There was agreement that there needed to be Content Type terms for both notated movement (which is already valid) and performed movement (which would need to be added).  A performance of a choreographic work is seen as a complex sort of work that may bring together choreographic, music, costume design, etc.  Such a performance creates a new work distinct from these distinct components.  In this, performances of choreographic works are similar in some ways to the performance of an opera.

LC will develop a revision proposal based on this discussion.

6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/2: Illustrative content and other augmentations

This is the first of four discussion papers submitted by the European RDA Interest Group. The JSC Chair will be responding to these papers based on the JSC discussion.

This paper deals with illustrative content and other augmentations of works based on the Final Report of the [FRBR] Working Group on Aggregates. The JSC expressed the belief that (a) proposals based in the aggregates report are premature, as this report has not yet been incorporated into the FR model (part of a reconciliation effort expected to be completed in 2015); and that (b) RDA already allows flexibility in treating secondary content as a component of a compilation or as a contribution to an expression.  It was noted that, when describing a manifestation, the cataloger may choose not to treat secondary content (such as illustrations) as independent expressions, and that this choice is an important part of the flexibility offered by RDA.

In a separate issue unrelated to the EURIG paper, but related to illustrative content, it was noted that an expression consisting entirely or chiefly of still images could not be characterized as "all illustrations" or "chiefly illustrations" because illustrative content is by definition secondary content; primary content is described in the Nature of the work element.  The Content Type "still image" can be used in such a case.  Eventually it is expected that the addition to RDA of an element for Extent of Expression will provide better ways of describing the such resources; see the discussion paper submitted by the ALA Task Force on Machine-Actionable Data Elements (6JSC/ALA/Discussion/1, discussed yesterday).

6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/3: Compilations of works

This paper suggests various ways in which the RDA instructions relating to compilations of works can be clarified.  In general, the JSC feels that much of what EURIG proposes is already possible following existing RDA instructions.  It was agreed that the instructions for compilations of works by multiple creators at might be in need of clarification, and LC agreed to draft a proposal.  Another issue raised by EURIG, relating to compilers, will be discussed tomorrow, when the JSC takes up discussion of 6JSC/ACOC/7.

6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/4: Representing dates of works and expressions in RDA

This paper suggests an elaborate structure of data elements for describing various dates that might be used as the date of a work.  The JSC generally felt that the proposed structure needed to be simplified.  More importantly, the JSC wishes to explore the modeling of event-based data generally in RDA, as well as to develop strategies for incorporating data-about-data (meta-metadata) in RDA.  These enhancements to the RDA model should allow for a better structure for recording dates of works and expressions in RDA.  The JSC will be referring these issues to a technical working group.

6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/5: Representing language of expressions in RDA

This paper suggests an enhanced structure for recording language of expression; among its features are (a) the ability to identify explicitly the language in which a work was originally expressed, (b) the identification of direct and indirect translations as such, and (c) explicit identification of languages of captions, dubbing, etc.  The JSC again noted that this proposal presented modeling issues (particularly the meta-metadata issue).  It was also observed that machine-actionability could be supported by structured notes (aggregates of elements identified as such), although it was not clear whether such aggregated notes should defined within RDA or in application profiles.

6JSC/ALA/23: Revision proposal for RDA instructions for treaties

This proposal seeks to make fundamental changes to the ways in which treaties are named.  Instead of creating a conventional title (the current practice), the proposal seeks to base the authorized access point on a preferred title consisting of (in this order of preference): the official title, a short title or citation title, any other official designation.

Before going through the details of the proposal, the JSC decided two general issues raised by the Library of Congress: (a) Because Signatory to a treaty is no longer used as part of the authorized access point, it will be eliminated as an element in RDA; instead, the relationship between the treaty and its signatories will be added to Chapter 19, with an appropriate relationship designator.  (b) Because the scope of the term "treaty" has been defined in RDA, the instructions will simply refer to "treaty" or "treaties" rather than "treaties or other agreements".

The proposal consisted of 27 distinct revisions.  For the record, I will note the JSC decision for each (I will refer to these only by number; for the subject of each revision, please consult the proposal and applicable responses).

1: agreed with LC to remove Signatory to a treaty and the paragraph that introduces it from the list of core elements at 0.6.3 and 5.3.
2: same
3: agreed
4: agreed
5: agreed with the proposal with the following changes: switch items a) and b) in the order of preference for selecting the preferred title; add an instruction on language of the title; change the explanation of an example
6: agreed to the revised wording proposed by LC
7: agreed
8: agreed
9: agreed to the LC wording (slightly modified)
10: agreed
11: Signatory to a treaty is to be removed from these instructions
12: agreed to the LC wording
13-15: agreed to collapse into a single instruction 

16: agreed to the LC wording

17: agreed to the LC wording

18: agreed with minor wording changes

19: agreed to the LC wording
20: agreed
21: agreed
22: agreed; examples of signatories may be moved to chapter 19
23-25: agreed
26: agreed to the LC suggestions
27: agreed to the LC suggestions           

6JSC/DNB/1:  Parts of the Bible: Books (RDA

This proposal seeks to replace the reliance on the Authorized Version of the Bible as the standard authority for naming books of the Bible with a general instruction to "choose as the preferred title a brief form of a well-established title in a language preferred by the agency creating the data."  The table listing groups of books ( will be moved to the Tools tab, as the practice preferred by some agencies; lists preferred by other agencies may be added in the future.  Other parts of will also be affected by this revision.

6JSC/LC/26: Changes to instructions on liturgical works (

This proposal seeks to clarify the instructions on authorized access points for liturgical works at  The JSC approved the version of this proposal in the ALA response.

6JSC/ALA/24: Variant title as access point (RDA,,,,

This proposal sought to add a provision for making a variant access point based on a variant title on its own (to parallel an existing instruction to make a variant access point based on the preferred title on its own).  The JSC decided instead to remove the instruction to make a variant access point based on the preferred title on its own from 6.27, 6.29, 6.30, and 6.31 (such an instruction does not appear in 6.28).  In the cases, of both preferred and variant title, RDA will rely on the general instruction to "Construct additional variant access points if considered important for access" and on some examples of access points based on preferred and variant titles, with appropriate explanations.

6JSC/ALA/26: Colour content (RDA 7.17)

This proposal was to merge the instructions for recording colour content of various types of resources into a single set of instructions.  The proposal was withdrawn.  Instead, the CILIP representative will develop a proposal that models colour as two distinct elements: (a) identification of monochrome vs polychrome, (b) the identification of the actual colours, and (c) the description of various production processes (such as tinting and toning) that can modify the colour content of a resource.


6JSC/Music/1: Proposed revision to instruction on ... two or more parts

This is the first of three proposals from the RDA Joint Music Working Group, made up of members from the Music Library Association, the Canadian Association of Music Libraries, and the Library of Congress.  This proposal was the result of a charge from the JSC to determine whether the instructions for recording the numbers of parts that had been revised in the case of musical works could be applied more generally.  It was the judgment of the JSC that the proposal demonstrated that the instructions (to record each numbered part separately) should not be generalized, and the proposed revisions to and were not approved. Additional revisions to the instructions at and were approved.

6JSC/Music/2: Proposed revision to instruction, Preferred title consisting solely of the name of one type of composition

The proposal sought to clarify the instructions for recording a preferred title consisting solely of the name of one type of composition.  The Working Group prepared a revised proposal (6JSC/Music/2/rev/2), primarily to clarify the choice of language of the title and the use of cognate forms.  The revised proposal was accepted, with the addition of sub-instruction numbers and captions:, Choice of Language and, Singular or Plural Form, some wording changes, and the designation of the instruction for ├ętude, fantasia, and sinfonia concertante as an exception.

6JSC/Music/3: Proposed revisions for medium of performance (RDA 6.15.1,,, and Appendix E.1.1)

This proposal suggests numerous revisions to 6.15.1 (the instructions for recording medium of performance as an element) and (the instructions for using medium of performance an an authorized access point representing a musical work). The objective is to remove restrictions from the instructions on recording the element, and moving those restrictions to the instructions for constructing the access point.  Thus complete descriptions of the medium may be recorded in the element, although a restricted version is used in the access point.  The proposal was approved, with the following modifications (only significant modifications are highlighted):

  • a distinction will be introduced between recording the number of instruments and recording the number of players.
  • [currently]: the optional addition to record the designation of key for an instrument will become the main instructions, with an alternative instruction to omit the key or range.
  • this new instruction on alternative and doubling instruments will be divided into separate instructions for these two categories.
  • wording proposed by CCC for the first paragraph was accepted.
  • this instruction consists of a number of exceptions to the general instruction to record a complete medium statement as instructed in 6.15; these exceptions are designed to continue current Anglo-American practice and avoid massive changes to authority and bibliographic records.  The JSC agreed to add a general alternative to the exceptions that would allow an agency to ignore the exceptions.
  • A number of examples in the proposal were replaced by others suggested by JSC constituencies or by the Working Group.


Tomorrow the JSC has a particularly busy agenda, considering groups of proposals on persons, families, and corporate bodies; on places; on subject relationships; and on other relationships.

The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA is currently meeting in Washington, DC, to consider proposals to revise RDA.

Let me start by saying that these reports are based on my own notes and recollections of the discussion.  They are intended to provide an early report of the meeting, but are not authoritative.  Later this month, the JSC will issue a summary of the outcomes of the meeting.  In (probably) several months, the official minutes of the meeting will be issued.  The revised text of the approved revisions will be published in the April 2014 release of the RDA Toolkit.

The agenda for the meeting, as well as copies of the documents under discussion, are available on the JSC website at

The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) consists of six members from five countries, plus the JSC Chair and the JSC Secretary.  Here is a picture taken this noon:

From left to right:
Bill Leonard, Canadian Committee on Cataloguing
Alan Danskin, British Library
Kevin Marsh, Austrialian Committee on Cataloguing
Barbara Tillett, JSC Chair
Judy Kuhagen, JSC Secretary
Kathy Glennan, American Library Association
Dave Reser, Library of Congress
Gordon Dunsire, CILIP
Christine Frodl, Deutsche Nationalbibliothek

Yesterday, the JSC met in executive session for most of the day.  During the brief public session, there were two items of interest:

  • The next JSC meeting is tentatively scheduled for November 3-7, 2014, in Washington, DC.  Both the specific dates and the location are preliminary and subject to change, although it is highly likely that the meeting will take place in early November.
  • The JSC considered ways of making JSC proposals more useful both to JSC members and to the general cataloging community.  In part, this will be based on a redesigned JSC website that will have better organizational capabilities.  In addition, the JSC agreed that each revision proposal should include a brief abstract that can be displayed on the website and used in announcements.

The main work of the JSC began today with consideration of three groups of proposals.


6JSC/CCC/13: Revision of RDA 1.7.3 (Punctuation)

This proposal suggested clarifications to the instructions on handling punctuation in transcribed elements, stating a general instruction to transcribe punctuation as it appears on the source, but specifying exceptions for punctuation separating different elements and for punctuation separating different instances of the same element.  The proposal was approved with some additional examples, and wording for explaining the examples suggested by LC.

6JSC/DNB/Discussion/1: Discussion paper: First issue v. latest (current) issue

This discussion paper describes German practice for describing serials and integrating resources.  In the case of minor changes, the description is based on the latest issue or iteration (whereas the practice in the other countries represented by the JSC is to base the description on the earliest issue).  The JSC had already agreed that "data created under RDA should be sufficiently flexible to support any approach, without compromising the capability to control and link descriptions of serial resources." The DNB presented different ways of providing this flexibility in RDA.

The JSC agreed that the best approach would be to record earliest, latest, and intervening information in a single set of elements, with data-about-data (meta-metadata) that would identify the source for each instance of the elements.  The DNB was advised to continue its current practices under a local application guideline.  The incoming JSC Chair will organize an effort to include meta-metadata in the RDA data model (which is an urgent need that has come up in relation to a variety of proposals discussed at this meeting).

6JSC/Examples/Discussion/1: Contextual examples in RDA

The JSC Examples Group (chaired by Kate James of LC) presented two discussion topics.  (1) They proposed to develop an "RDA Examples Editorial Guide" to document decisions about the content and style of examples in RDA.  This proposal was accepted.  (2) They raised the question of the inclusion of initial articles in RDA examples (based on the revision of RDA instructions in 2011),  Two options were discussed: Option A was to revise all the examples in RDA to include initial articles when appropriate; in other words, all the examples would illustrate the main instruction, rather then the alternative (to omit the articles).  Option C would retain existing examples that illustrated the alternative, and would add explanations to explain why the articles had been omitted.  The JSC asked the Examples Group to prepare revisions based on Option A; because of the widespread impact on the text, it was left open how and when these changes would be implemented.


6JSC/CCC/11: Revision of RDA (Titles of parts, sections, and supplements) and RDA (Collective title and titles of individual contents)

This proposal is an effort to clarify two instructions that deal with common or collective titles v. titles of parts, sections, etc.  In RDA, the JSC agreed to accept the ALA rewording of the CCC proposal, but with changes that would avoid introducing the concept of dependent/independent titles, relying instead on whether the part title was "sufficient to identify" the resource.  The CCC and ALA reps were asked to prepare a revised proposal for JSC consideration before the end of the week; this would include a definition of "common title" for the Glossary.  In RDA, the JSC agreed with the CCC proposal, with the addition of references to the guidelines for comprehensive and analytical descriptions in chapter 1.  An additional issues relating to similar instructions at was determined to be a separate issue that will be dealt with later.

6JSC/ISSN/2/JSC response/ISSN response: Response to JSC response of ISSN discussion paper /2

The ISSN response indicated their intention to submit a proposal to deal with the "first five words" in the provisions for title changes in the case of languages (such as Japanese) that do not divide text into words.  The JSC Chair will respond that we are awaiting this proposal with gratitude to ISSN for developing it.

6JSC/DNB/3: Attributes of manifestations: Instructions for more than one instance of an element

The DNB sought to clarify the RDA instructions when there are multiple instances of an element, and the cataloger chooses to go beyond the core requirement to record the first instance: Does RDA expect that the cataloger either must record only the first instance or must record all instances ("all or nothing") or does RDA allow the cataloger to record additional instances selectively ("shopping-cart")?  The JSC agreed to the statement (to be included in RDA 0.6.1) that "Only one instance of a core element is required. Subsequent instances are optional." -- i.e., the JSC opted for the "shopping-cart" approach.  The JSC did not agree to the proposals to change specific instructions from "if there is more than one statement..." to "if more than one statement is recorded"; two instances that already say "if more than one statement is recorded" ( and will be revised.

6JSC/LC/24: Revisions to instructions for production, publication, distribution, and manufacture statements (2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 2.10)

This complex proposal attempted to resolve a number of issues in these elements:

  • One of these issues dealt with the concept of "grammatically separable" information included in an element; these proposals were withdrawn by LC.
  • The JSC agreed to more the optional omission of parts of the corporate hierarchy from the general instructions for the aggregate statement to the specific instructions for the producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer element.
  • The JSC agreed to add references to the instructions for recording relationships to the producer, publisher, distributor, manufacturer (using wording suggested by CCC).
  • The JSC agreed to add a missing general instruction to (but without the proposed "e.g." statement).
  • The JSC agreed to remove the conditional clause from that would allow a manufacturer statement to be recorded only if there were no publication or distribution information available.
  • The JSC agreed to add a guideline in each chapter that the name may be "represented by a characterizing word or phrase."
  • The JSC agreed to defer action on further proposals relating to the statement of function (, etc.); the British Library will prepare a discussion on how to deal with statements of function that are associated with the name of the producer, etc.

6JSC/LC/25: Recording dates in more than one calendar (RDA,,,,,

The JSC approved this proposal to allow the recording of dates in more than one calendar, using wording provided by ALA.  The inclusion of an optional omission (to record the date only in the calendar preferred by the agency creating the data) was withdrawn.  The JSC further agreed to a proposal from ACOC (via Fast Track) to include similar provisions for copyright dates in; the Secretary will provide wording for consideration by the JSC before the end of the week.

6JSC/ACOC/9: Qualifications after an identifier: amendments to RDA

The JSC approved the proposal to add examples and explanations of examples clarifying that the use of abbreviations in qualifications of identifiers would be based on how the information appeared in the resource.  Wording refinements from BL, CCC, and LC were accepted.

6JSC/ALA rep/6: Note on Manifestation and Item

The JSC agreed to the following structure for notes on manifestation and item in chapters 2 and 3:

2.17  Note on Manifestation [subsequent instructions renumbered]
2.21  Note on Item

3.21  Note on Carrier
3.22  Note on Item-Specific Carrier Characteristics [currently 3.21]

A definition will be drafted for 2.17, 2.21, and 3.21; the definition of the new 3.22 will be revised for consistency with the other definitions.


6JSC/ALA/Discussion/1: Machine-Actionable Data Elements in RDA: Discussion Paper (2013)

This discussion paper updates a similar discussion paper presented in 2012, and represents further development of the thinking of the ALA Task Force working on this issue.  There were three recommendations in the paper: 
  1. Add an element for Extent of expression.  The JSC responses supported this recommendation, although with some uncertainty about exactly what would be proposed; ALA was encouraged to bring forward a proposal.
  2. Add an element for Extent of item.  The JSC responses indicated skepticism about this, and discussion indicated that what was desired was not a formal description of the extent of items, but the ability to provide annotations indicating differences from the extent of the manifestation (e.g., an indication of imperfections in, or additions to, the copy being described). 
  3. Extend the RDA/ONIX Framework to flesh out further sets of categories for content and carriers.  There was general agreement, and the incoming JSC Chair undertook to assure that a working group to address maintenance of the Framework would be formed and these issues referred to that group. 
  4. Modify the Aspect-Unit-Quantity model.  The JSC responses were supportive of the work on this model done during the past year and encouraged the ALA Task Force to complete its work on the model and present revision proposals.

6JSC/CCC/14: Revision of RDA 3.5.3 (Dimensions of still images)

This proposal was withdrawn; the proposal and responses were referred to the ALA Task Force on Machine-Actionable Data Elements, to be folded into their work.

6JSC/ALA rep/1/rev:  Revision to Categorization of Content and Carrier

This proposal contained a draft revision of an outdated document that related the RDA Carrier Type, Media Type, and Content Type categories to the RDA/ONIX Framework; it also contained a list of issues relating to current RDA categories, and a list of further revisions to the RDA categories or the RDA/ONIX Framework (for future consideration). The JSC agreed to review the draft document and the issues relating to current RDA categories (by May 1, 2014), after which it is hoped that the revised specifications can be published on the JSC website.


Tomorrow, the JSC will discuss proposals related to works and expressions, including three proposals relating to musical works from the RDA Music Joint Working Group.

The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA began its 2013 meetings with an executive session that lasted almost the entire day.  The few announcements that were made in public session will be included in tomorrow's blog entry -- along with a report of the decisions made tomorrow on the first group of revision proposals.

At its meeting on Thursday, the Joint Steering Committee completed action on the remaining items on the public agenda.  This included groups of proposals relating to Music; Works other than music; Corporate bodies; and Places.

(and Notated Music Statement)

6JSC/ALA/13: Revision of RDA instructions relating to librettos and lyrics for musical works (RDA,, I.2.1, Glossary)

JSC agreed with the proposal to add "lyrics" to the list of terms for Complete Works in a Single Form, with wording changes offered by BL and CCC.

6JSC/CCC/7: Proposed revision to instructions, Two or More Parts;, Compilations of Musical Works; and, Two or More Parts

JSC agreed with the proposed revisions, with some modifications suggested by LC. The RDA Music Working Group will be asked to look into the inconsistencies between these revised instructions for music and the general instructions.

6JSC/ALA/12: Revision of RDA, Recording Medium of Performance

ALA withdrew the proposed addition of an Alternative to use an external vocabulary, on the grounds that this is authorized generally by RDA 0.12.

JSC agreed to the additional paragraph referring to 7.21 and to changes at 7.21 suggested by LC.

6JSC/CCC/9: Proposed revision to instruction, Recording Numeric Designations of Musical Works

JSC agreed to the proposed revision and to the explanatory text for one of the examples suggested by ALA.

6JSC/ALA/14: Revision of RDA instructions for arrangements and adaptations of musical works (RDA and

1.  JSC disagreed with the addition of the Rzewski example; agreed to the addition of the Hogan example, with the addition of explanatory text: "Incorporates new material resulting in a new work"; agreed to replace the Elling example with one that more clearly illustrates creator roles; agreed to the LC wording for the new paragraph on unknown adapters; and agreed to a new example at proposed by CCC.

2.  JSC disagreed with adding "traditional" to the list of examples of "popular" music; agreed to add the proposed new example (with modifications to the explanatory text).

3. ALA withdrew the proposal for an additional example.

Definitions of Adaptation and Arrangement will be added to the Glossary; ALA will make a Fast Track proposal.

The Examples Group will look into the relationship between "e.g." lists in RDA scope statements and the scope of the examples for that element.

6JSC/ALA/8: Revision of RDA, Additions to access points representing musical works with titles that are not distinctive

JSC agreed to the proposed revision, with wording changes offered by LC and CCC.

6JSC/CCC/8: Proposed revision to instruction, Additions to Access Points Representing Compilations of Musical Works

JSC agreed to the revision, using the wording provided by LC.

6JSC/EURIG/4: Musical arrangements (RDA and

EURIG withdrew the proposal, recognizing that the issue was more complicated than their proposed solution.  The RDA Music Working Group is already working on a proposal.

A Fast Track proposal will be made to document the two definitions of "Transcription" used within RDA.

6JSC/EURIG/Discussion/1: Musical arrangements (RDA and

EURIG withdrew their discussion paper.

6JSC/IAML/1: Revision of RDA,, Designation of Edition; addition i Chapter 2 of a core element for Format of Notated Music Statement

JSC disagreed with the proposal, preferring to emphasize the similarities between Edition statements and Format of notated music statements, rather than the differences, and therefore preferring that both ISBD elements be mapped to the RDA Edition Statement element.


6JSC/ACOC/5: Compilations in RDA chapter 6: Discussion paper

ACOC noted that the responses answered their concerns.  They will submit a Fast Track proposal to add additional references to help indicate where certain instructions are to be found.  At a later date, they will submit a proposal to add the missing instruction for choosing the preferred title of a compilation.

6JSC/LC/19: Additional instructions for preferred sources and preferred titles in different languages or scripts (RDA and

JSC agreed with the proposal, with modifications suggested by CCC.

6JSC/CCC/6: Instruction for choosing the preferred title for choreographic works (RDA

CCC withdrew the proposal.  The problems presented by choreographic works are general to works in non-textual form; CCC will work on a more general proposal.

6JSC/LC/20: Revisions to RDA Chapter 6 to treat "Selections" as a work attribute

JSC agreed to the proposal; for change 6 and 8, the language approved in 6JSC/CCC/7 is to be used instead of that proposed by LC.

6JSC/ALA/5: Revision of RDA 6.21, Other distinguishing characteristics of a legal work, and (Additions to access points representing treaties, etc.

JSC agreed to the proposed revisions.

6JSC/BL/8: Change to 19.3 and Appendix I, Recording relationships to persons, families, and corporate bodies associated with works of unknown or uncertain origin

BL withdrew this proposal and will make a new proposal based on the responses.

6JSC/ALA/15: Hearings in RDA

JSC approved the proposal with an addition suggested by BL.  ALA will consider whether further revisions to chapter 6 or chapter 11 are needed to give instructions on creating authorized access points for hearings.


6JSC/ALA/18: Proposed Revision of RDA Instructions for Government and Non-Government Corporate Bodies

JSC gave general approval to the proposed reorganization of the instructions on subordinate corporate bodies.

Regarding the numbered recommendations in the ALA proposal, JSC modified #3 with additional wording suggested by CCC; disagreed with #8 (i.e., the current Type 6 will be retained); agreed to delete the "post-medieval" exception in #10; and disagreed with #11 (i.e., retaining the current instruction for legislative subcommittees, along with the exception for subcommittees of the U.S. Congress).

In addition, JSC decided:
  • to add a general instruction "In case of doubt, record the name of the body directly" that would apply to all the types.
  • to merge the types for Government Officials and for Religious Officials, but to retain the two sets of instructions at and [new numbering]
  • to add language at suggested by CCC.
  • to replace the "Type X" numbering with subsection numbers, with captions; these numbers and captions would be included in the navigation pane in the Toolkit.

6JSC/LC/18: Revisions to Change of Name of Jurisdiction or Locality (RDA

JSC agreed to the additional sentence in, but agreed with ALA that it should be an Optional Addition.  JSC agreed to additional revisions to proposed by LC (these additional revisions were included in a document distributed at the meeting and are not in the LC proposal).

6JSC/LC/11: Revision to Date Associated with the Corporate Body (RDA 11.4, 11.4.3, 11.4.4, 0.6.4

JSC agreed to the proposal, with some additional changes to the list of core elements in 0.6.4.

6JSC/LC/10: Revision to RDA, Number, date, location, of a conference, etc.

JSC agreed to the Option 1 proposal, with revised provided by LC (in a document distributed at the meeting).


6JSC/ALA/19: Proposed revision of RDA 16.2.2, Preferred Name for the Place

1. Agreed with the revised wording for "the former USSR and the former Yugoslavia"; decided not to remove Malaysia from this instruction until the National Library of Malaysia can be consulted.

2., Ireland: Agreed to the revision, using the wording provided by LC.

3. New instruction Agreed to follow the LC response; the new instruction would have the caption "Overseas territories, dependencies, etc."  Agreed that U.S. territories would be treated under, not

4. (new number): Agreed to add an alternative to include the name of a "state, province, or highest-level administrative division" as part of the preferred name of  place.

5. Abbreviations of place names: Agreed that the ambiguous abbreviation "V.I." should be deleted from Appendix B, and examples; ALA will submit a Fast Track proposal.  Agreed that ALA should develop a proposal to remove all of the abbreviations for places from Appendix B and examples throughout RDA.

6. Future plans: Agreed with the plans proposed by ALA; suggested that a discussion paper might precede an actual proposal; noted the interest of EURIG is collaborating on this effort; and confirmed a preference for treating larger/smaller places as relationships rather than as additions to the preferred name string.

6JSC/ALA/9: Initial Articles in Place Names (RDA

JSC agreed to the proposed revisions, with modifications suggested by LC.

I reported on Tuesday, regarding 6JSC/BL/3, that BL would develop a revised proposal; in a fit on insomnia, the BL representative drafted the revised proposal overnight, and the JSC approved it.  This revised document will be posted to the JSC website shortly.

This completed all of the JSC public agenda.  On Friday, the JSC will hold an executive session, discussing issued raised by the Committee of Principals and planning its future work.  This will include the preparation of a list of the outcomes of the meeting, which we hope to distribute as soon as possible.  The official minutes of the meeting will take several months to prepare.

I do not currently plan to post a blog on tomorrow's meeting, but who knows what may come up.

This is my last JSC meeting as the ALA Representative to the Joint Steering Committee.  I don't know whether my successor (not yet named) will want to continue this sort of blog.  In any case, it would not surprise me if I attend future JSC meetings as an observer and may decide to continue the blog myself.
The Joint Steering Committee spent most of the day in executive sessions.

In the morning we met with the Committee of Principals.  The JSC chair reported on the group's activities since last year's meeting in Glasgow (an updated version of this report will be issued as the Annual Report of the JSC shortly after the end of the year).  The CoP gratefully accepted Barbara Tillett's offer to complete her term as JSC Chair through the end of 2013.  The two groups had a wide-ranging discussion on relations between RDA and the linked open data community and making RDA interoperate in that environment; possibilities for the future composition of the JSC; and some options for providing support for JSC activities.  Announcements on some of these issues will be made soon.

At lunchtime, the JSC took their annual photos commemorating the meeting.


Left-right: Christine Frodl (DNB), BIll Leonard (CCC), Barbara Tillett (LC, chair), Gordon Dunsire (CILIP -- on the laptop), John Attig (ALA), Judy Kuhagen (secretary), Alan Danskin (BL), Kevin Marsh (ACOC)

During the brief public session after lunch, the JSC dealt with agenda items 15 (Number of records) and 18 (Expressions other than music).


6JSC/ISSN/1: Revision of RDA and RDA regarding change in media type for serials

The JSC agreed to revisions to and to, both based on the wording proposed by LC.

6JSC/ISSN/3: Serials and changes in mode of issuance: Discussion paper

The JSC encouraged the ISSN Network to submit a proposal dealing with changes in mode of issuance; JSC will forward to them the comments that were included in the constituency responses.

6JSC/ISSN/2: Major title changes for serials in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean: Discussion paper

The JSC looks forward to seeing the results of any testing conducted by the ISSN Network and to a proposal dealing with major title changes for serials in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.  The JSC will forward to them the comments that were included in the constituency responses, including a recommendation that the current instruction be retained and that the revision only deal with titles in CJK.


6JSC/EURIG/2: Date of expression (RDA and

The JSC disagreed with the approach proposed by EURIG.  We accepted the revision to the scope of Date of Expression ( proposed by LC, but recognize that this is only a first step; it will help catalogers to apply the instructions, but it will not provide additional granularity of dates that might be used for machine matching.  BL indicated their intention to prepare a new proposal to define sub-types for date of expression as outlined in the BL response to 6JSC/EURIG/2.

6JSC/EURIG/3: Language of expression (RDA 6.11,,, 7.;12.1.3,

6.11: The JSC agreed that Language of Expression should be a core element unconditionally; the core element note will be deleted at 6.11, leaving only the "Core Element" caption.

The JSC disagreed with the remainder of the proposal.  BL again indicated their intention to prepare a new proposal to define sub-types for Language of Expression as outlined in the BL response to 6JSC/EURIG/3.

6JSC/EURIG/1: Addition of examples in RDA and 6.27.3

The BL representative withdrew the proposal on behalf of EURIG.  It was agreed to add examples of non-musical performances to and 6.27.3 (as Fast Track proposals). It was not clear where examples of musical performances would be given in 6.18 and/or 6.28; the RDA Music Working Group will be asked to look at this and other issues involving these instructions.

Thursday morning, the JSC will take up the proposals dealing with Music and with Works other than music.  Since we have already completed the Thursday afternoon agenda, we plan to deal with the proposals relating to corporate bodies (agenda item 20) during the afternoon session.

The JSC meeting continued this morning with a discussion of some miscellaneous documents dealing with issues related to the RDA element set, vocabularies, the Registry, and the Glossary.  The afternoon sessions dealt with proposals related to Persons (RDA Chapter 9).

One of the key participants in the morning's discussions was Gordon Dunsire, the CILIP representative.  In my blog yesterday, I neglected to mention that Gordon was unable to travel to Chicago for the meetings.  Thanks to the good folks at ALA, Gordon was able to attend virtually from his home in Edinburgh with both video and audio connections through conferencing software.  Although there were some intermittent technical difficulty, overall this has worked very well.  Troy Linker noted that this technology could be used to stream our meetings as webinars to a broad audience.  The JSC will consider doing this for future meetings.


6JSC/ALA Rep/4: RDA vocabularies: Miscellaneous issues

This paper was a laundry list of miscellaneous issues that I encountered in the course of publishing RDA vocabularies in the Open Metadata Registry

  • Singular and plural terms: The JSC agreed that terms should be given in the Registry in singular form; when plural forms are called for, this should be treated as a linguistic variant of the term, not given explicitly as a separate concept.  Plural forms will not be added to the Registry, and existing plural forms will be deleted before the vocabularies are published.
  • There are some instructions in RDA that call for using terms from a different vocabulary; for example, the general guidelines for Extent call for use of terms from the Carrier Type vocabulary.  Gordon argues that this sort of duplication can be specified in an application profile and will do further analysis of this issue.
  • Fragmentary terms:  There is some terminology specified in RDA that does not constitute an independent term, such as approximately, folded, incomplete, unnumbered.  Some of these can be dealt with by defining combined terms such as folded leaves or unnumbered pages.  The other cases of fragmentary terminology need further study; again Gordon volunteered to do this.
  • Groups of Books of the Bible: The JSC had already decided to delete this vocabulary from the Registry on the grounds that these are better treated through authority records.  I was able to announce that these terms has now been deleted from the Registry.
  • Single or multiple vocabularies: There are some cases in which RDA contains instructions on terms for various subsets of a vocabulary, such as Extent of Still Image, Extent of Text.  The JSC expressed a preference for treating these as a single vocabulary and headings such as Extent of Text as captions within the instructions, but not as formal element sub-types.
  • "Top Concepts": In RDA some vocabularies are separated into sections with captions; for example, the Carrier Type vocabulary is divided into Audio Carriers, Computer Carriers, etc.  In RDA these are broader terms, but are not themselves valid terms.  The JSC felt that there was no good reason not to treat these as valid terms.

6JSC/ALA Rep/5: References in the RDA Glossary and the RDA namespace

This paper described the various conventions for making references that have been used in the RDA Glossary.  The JSC agreed not to make a distinction between see and see also reference, to make references from varying terminology when appropriate, to make broader term/narrower term references when appropriate, and to make scope notes (but not references) describing the differences among related terms.

6JSC/CILIP Rep/1: Machine-actionability and interoperability of RDA value vocabularies

This paper made five recommendations concerning the RDA value vocabularies.

Recommendation. 1:  Definitions need to be separated from scope notes: JSC agreed; CILIP will develop a proposal to correct existing issues.

Recommendation 2: Update the documentation on the relationship between the Content Type, Media Type, and Carrier Type vocabularies and the RDA/ONIX Framework.  The JSC agreed; Gordon and I will prepare a document. 

Recommendation 3: Develop an RDF representation of the RDA/ONIX Framework in a Registry so that other vocabularies can be mapped to it; JSC agreed; the RDA/ONIX group will acquire a namespace, and Gordon will create and publish the vocabularies.


Recommendation 4: Conduct an analysis of possibilities for extending RDA's use of the RDA/ONIX Framework; Gordon will do the analysis.


Recommendation 5: Create a management and development group for the RDA/ONIX Framework.  Alan Danskin is in contact with ONIX people and will work to set up such a group.

6JSC/CILIP Rep/2: RDF representation of RDA relationship designators

One of the important issues with the Registry is whether the Relationship Designators should be represented as element sets (RDF properties) or as value vocabularies.  This paper discusses this and makes eleven recommendations.

Recommendation 1: Make the names used in URIs to be consistent and to include RDA branding; JSC agreed.

Recommendation 2: Represent the Relationship Designators as RDF properties; JSC agreed.

Recommendation 3: Add "Agent" as a super-class referring collectively to Persons, Families, and Corporate Bodies; JSC agreed.

Recommendation 4: Remove redundant unconstrained properties from the element sets; to do this, we need definitions for unconstrained properties.

Recommendation 5: Move the unconstrained elements to a separate Registry, leaving the constrained elements in the RDvocab namespace; JSC decided that this should be done, that both the constrained and unconstrained element sets should be considered as RDA content to be authorized by the JSC; ALA Publishing will acquire a namespace for the unconstrained element set.

Recommendation 6: Once the unconstrained element set is moved to the separate namespace, delete WEMI qualifiers that were only needed to distinguish between the unconstrained and the constrained elements, while retaining the qualifiers that are needed to distinguish between two or more constrained elements.  Gordon will do this.

Recommendation 7: Develop and register inverse properties.

Recommendation 8: Change the labels for properties for relationship designators to verbal phrases, e.g., Has Author/Is Author of.

Recommendation 9: Change the labels for elements to verbal phrases, e.g, HasCarrierType.

Recommendation 10: Do not represent relationship designators as RDF classes. JSC agreed.

Recommendation 11: Represent relationship designators as concepts in value vocabularies in addition to the representation as properties (recommendation 2); JSC agreed that it might be useful to do this.  However, they asked Gordon to prepare a discussion paper dealing with recommendations 7, 8, 9, and 11.

6JSC/ISBD/Discussion/2: Mapping of ISBD Area 0 vocabularies to RDA/ONIX Framework vocabularies as part of the ISBD/RDA alignment

The plan for mapping the ISBD Area 0 vocabularies to the RDA Content Type, Media Type and Carrier Type vocabularies is to map each to the RDA/ONIX Framework.  The ISBD Review Group has presented a draft of their map. The JSC is planning to do a comparable map, at which point both groups will be able to evaluate the results.

6JSC/ISBD/Discussion/1: Alignment of the ISBD element set with RDA element set: RDA Appendix D.1

In the case of the ISBD and RDA element sets, the plan is to map these directly to each other.  The ISBD Review Group had presented a draft mapping.  The JSC will comment on the draft mapping.

PERSONS (Chapter 9)

6JSC/BL/4: Other designation associated with the person (RDA 9.0, 9.6.1 and 9.19.1)

1. 9.0: Person: Purpose and scope: Agreed to the BL revision.
2. 9.6: Other designation associated with the person: Agreed to the wording proposed by LC.
3. Agreed to the revision.
4. (agreed to the LC wording); (agreed), (agreed); examples will be added.
5. Agreed to the revision.
6. Other changes: agreed.

6JSC/LC/15: Reorganization of instruction on saints in

Agreed to the reorganization of the instructions on saints in; agreed to the comparable reorganization at suggested by ALA.

6JSC/LC/9: Revisions to Date Associated with the Person (RDA 9.3, 9.3.2, 9.3.3)

Agreed to the core element statement proposed by LC, with a correction from CCC.

6JSC/LC/22: Revisions to Date Associated with the Person (9.3) when recording more than a year alone

1. Agreed to change the exception at to an optional addition.
2. Agreed to remove the final paragraph of
3. Agreed to the CCC wording for changes to

6JSC/LC/14: Revision to RDA (Recording Dates Associated with Persons), H.1 (B.C. and A.D. Dates), and associate examples to clarify recording date spans

Agreed to the proposal.

6JSC/BL/3: Terms of rank, honour or office (RDA 9l.4.1 and 9.19.1)

BL plans to respond to the objections listed in the LC response; they will prepare a revised proposal.

6JSC/BL/6: Other place associated with the person (RDA 9.11)

Agreed to the LC proposal, which would rename the element as Place of Residence, Etc.

6JSC/ALA/6: Revision of RDA, Recording Associated Institutions, and RDA, Recording Affiliations

Agreed to the proposal to use the preferred name; agreed with LC to delete the exception for place as Location of Conference; examples will be checked to conform to this decision.

6JSC/BL/7: Change to definition of, Profession or Occupation

Agreed to the definition proposed by LC; BL will do a proposal to make comparable changes to (Field of Activity).

6JSC/LC/12: Priority order of additions to authorized access points representing a person (,,

Some problems were identified that could not be resolved; LC will do a revised proposal and JSC will reconsider.

6JSC/LC/16: Additional exception in, Title or Other Designation Associated with the Person, for titles of religious rank

Agreed to the exception for titles of religious rank proposed by LC; some examples will be moved to follow the exception.

6JSC/BL/5: Fuller forms of name (RDA, Optional addition)

The proposal was withdrawn by BL.

Tomorrow will begin with a closed meeting of the Committee of Principals and the JSC.  During the afternoon session, we plan to deal with agenda items 15 (Number of records for serials) and 18 (Expressions other than music).

Let me start by saying that these reports on the meeting of the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA are based on my own notes and recollections of the discussion.  They are intended to provide an early report of the meeting, but are not authoritative.  Later this month, the JSC will issue a summary of the outcomes of the meeting.  In (probably) several months, the official minutes of the meeting will be issued.

The agenda for the meeting, as well as copies of the documents under discussion, are available on the JSC website at

The Joint Steering Committee members present are:

Barbara Tillett, Library of Congress, Chair
John Attig, American Library Association
Alan Danskin, British Library
Gordon Dunsire, CILIP
Christine Frodl, Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
Bill Leonard, Canadian Committee on Cataloguing
Kevin Marsh, Australian Committee on Cataloguing

Also participating are

Judy Kuhagen, JSC Secretary
Troy Linker, ALA Publishing
The morning was devoted to an executive session.  Two items will be of interest:

  • Barbara Tillett will be retiring from the Library of Congress at the end of November 2012; her replacement as LC Representative to the Joint Steering Committee will be David Reser.  Barbara has expressed her willingness to complete her term as chair until through 2013; this offer was enthusiastically supported by the JSC, but will need to be confirmed by the Committee of Principals.
  • Troy Linker reported (among other things) on future development of the RDA Toolkit.  He noted several significant plans for 2013:  (a) The RDA Toolkit will implement display of RDA in multiple languages, beginning with the German and French translations (currently scheduled for release in February 2013).  (b) The reworded chapters of RDA will begin to appear in the December 2012 release, and all the reworded chapters should be available by the April 2013 release.

The public meeting began on Monday afternoon, with the discussion of two groups of proposals:


6JSC/ALA/20: Proposed revision of RDA and, Basis for Identification of the Resource

This proposal consisted of three sections:  (1) Collective Titles; (2) Predominant Work; (3) Resources Issued in More than One Part.  All three were approved, with wording changes suggested in various responses.

6JSC/ALA/21: Proposed revisions of RDA instructions on Sources of Information (RDA

This proposal also consisted of three sections:  (A) Containers in and 2.2.4 -- accepted with revised wording from LC; (B) Covers as sources of information -- accepted with the addition of "or jackets" suggested by LC; (C) Priority of sources in and -- accepted with revised wording suggested by CCC and LC.

6JSC/BL/9: Change to 2.2.4 to remove parallel title proper

The JSC accepted an ALA suggestion to add the following sentence to "If the title proper is taken from outside the resource, take parallel titles proper from the same source" instead of the revision to 2.2.4 proposed by BL.

6JSC/LC/13: Adjustment to exception for recording acronym/initialism titles in favor of base instruction ( exception)

In response to comments about wanting to be able to record the acronym or initialism as both other title information and as variant title, LC noted that the definition of Variant Title ( does not currently allow this.  JSC approved the LC proposal as written.  There may be a need to revisit the definition of Variant Title at a later date.

6JSC/ALA/10: Revision of RDA, Recording Edition Statements

The proposal was approved with wording changes suggested by CCC and LC and an additional example suggested by LC.  It was noted that distinct expressions can be identified by Other Distinguishing Characteristics of the Expression; a future proposal may be needed to provide specific instructions for doing this.

Fast Track proposal for RDA Add "Consider all remote-access electronic resources to be published"

The proposal was approved; the exact wording will be "Consider all online resources to be published."

6JSC/ALA/11: Revision of RDA, Recording Copyright Dates

The JSC accepted a compromise suggested by ALA.  Instead of defining an exception for phonogram copyright dates, two instructions will be given in the general instruction. In the case of multiple copyright dates that apply to various aspects of the resource, any that are considered important for identification and selection may be recorded.  In the case of multiple copyright dates that apply to a single aspect, only the latest copyright date is to be recorded.

6JSC/ALA/7: Revision of RDA 2.12.8 and 2.12.16 regarding recording ISSNs

The JSC accepted the proposal, with two significant changes suggested by BL: (a) instead of "any source" there will be a list of sources in order of preference. (b) The instruction will be to "transcribe" (not "record") the ISSN.


6JSC/ALA/17: Machine-Actionable Data Elements in RDA Chapter 3: Discussion Paper

Based on the discussion in the responses, ALA will continue to develop the proposal to add structured, machine-actionable definitions for the Extent and Dimensions elements.  They will also develop a proposal to add Extent of Expression to the RDA element set.

6JSC/LC/17: Reorganization of instructions for recording extent (,

The proposal was approved, with additional wording suggested by ACOC.

6JSC/LC/21: Clarification of leaves and pages ( and Glossary)

LC proposed alternative wording to deal with three specific cases: (a) volumes printed and numbered on each page; (b) volumes printed on each page and numbered in terms of pages, but only the odd-numbered (recto) pages bear the numbering; and (c) volumes that are printed on each page, but only the leaves are numbered (this last is to be treated as misleading numbering (  In addition, language is to be added to indicating when to use "pages" and when to use "leaves" when recording the extent of unnumbered pages.  These revisions were accepted provisionally, until I have had a chance to confirm ALA's agreement.

6JSC/BL/2: 3.11.4, Layout of Tactile Text and 3.13, Font Size

This proposal had two parts: (1) Move jumbo braille to Font Size (3.13) -- accepted with wording changes proposed by CCC, LC; (2) merge 3.11.1 and 3.11.4 -- accepted an LC proposal to merge all the instructions on layout.

6JSC/ALA/16: Revision of RDA 3.19.3 for video encoding formats and addition of a new element for Optical Disc Characteristics

Rather than retaining an RDA vocabulary for encoding format, the JSC wants to pursue the use of external vocabularies.  Therefore, they do not wish to make significant changes to the present vocabularies.  ALA withdrew its proposal.  The corrections to terminology and definitions in the current list at 3.19.3 will be proposed as Fast Track changes.

6JSC/ACOC/6: Revision of RDA, Recording transmission speed

The name of the element will be changed to Encoded Bitrate, as proposed by LC; examples will be retained.

6JSC/CCC/10: Proposed revision to Appendix B.1, General Guideline, to explicitly include the usage of units of measure expressed as symbols

The proposal was accepted, using the wording proposed by BL.  The name of Appendix B will be changed to "Abbreviations and Symbols" and CCC will work to identify other changes that may be necessary both in the Appendix and in instructions that refer to Appendix B.

The JSC was encouraged that we were able to complete all the business scheduled for Monday on our agenda.  Tomorrow morning we will take up various technical documents discussing the RDA element set, vocabularies, registry, and glossary.  In the afternoon, we will discuss proposals relations to Persons (Chapter 9).

The final day of the 2011 meeting of the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA began with presentations by Gordon Dunsire about two areas of interest to both the JSC and the ISBD Review Group.

The first issue -- see 6JSC/Chair/5 -- concerned mapping ISBD Area 0 terms and RDA Carrier Type and Content Type terms to the base categories in the RDA/ONIX Framework for Resource Categorization (ROF).  Mapping both ISBD and RDA vocabularies to the ROF allows specification of the relationship between the ISBD and RDA terms. Both groups agreed that this approach should be followed.

The second issue -- see 6JSC/Chair/4 -- concerned the mapping of the ISBD and RDA elements. Again both groups agreed that this should be done. This will involve examining the definitions of the elements in each standard to determine whether they are equivalent or whether one is a subproperty of the other.  The revision of the ISBD specifications in Appendix D of RDA, which the ISBD Review Group yesterday had agreed to undertake, will be treated as a first approximation of the mapping specifications and will serve as the basis for a more rigorous analysis that will be needed before the actual mapping can be done.

In both cases, the mappings will eventually be encoded in RDF/SKOS format in the Open Metadata Registry -- where the elements for both ISBD and RDA are registered.

The rest of the meeting took place in executive session.  Actions included the following:

  • The JSC approved terms of reference for a new Examples Group and discussed details about forming the group.

  • The JSC updated its document tracking progress towards implementing the recommendations of the US RDA Test Coordinating Committee; the updated tracking document will be posted shortly.

  • The JSC confirmed the outcomes of the meeting and indicated what actions to include in the summary Outcomes report, which should be posted in a few weeks.

Deirdre Kiorgaard, representative of the Australian Committee on Cataloguing, ended her term as a member of JSC; Kevin Marsh (also in attendance this week) will be the new ACOC representative.  Alan Danskin ended his term as chair of the JSC, but will continue as the representative of the British Library; Thurston Young ended his term as JSC Secretary.

The new Chair of the JSC will be Barbara Tillett of the Library of Congress; Judy Kuhagen will serve as the JSC Secretary.

Tomorrow is Guy Fawkes Day -- google it if you don't know what that is -- which is perhaps a fitting ending for a JSC meetings.

Cheers from Glasgow!