Library of Congress and Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements

The Library of Congress/Program for Cooperative Cataloging Policy Statements

When the RDA Steering Committee (RSC) went through the process of changing original RDA to official RDA, the entire framework for the instructions fundamentally changed. As a result, the policy statements also had to change.

One of the most significant changes was that instructions in original RDA became options in official RDA. This changed the purpose of the policy statements because each option required a policy statement to indicate whether an LC/PCC cataloger should apply it or not, or if they could exercise judgment to make the decision.

A second significant change was that the core elements of original RDA were eliminated in official RDA. Instead, official RDA defines a very basic minimum description for each RDA entity that only requires recording an appellation element (i.e., a name, title, access point, or identifier), and possibly one or two additional elements. Therefore, the policy statements are essential for stating what LC/PCC consider core elements.

A third significant change was the layout of the RDA Toolkit, which no longer allowed for lengthy policy statements and examples. LC/PCC decided to take all the examples out of the policy statements and place them in external documentation, known as Metadata Guidance documentation (MGDs). Consequently, the policy statements are relatively brief, with some being longer.

A fourth and final significant change was the use of the DITA (Darwin Information Typing Architecture) format to encode the policy statements. DITA is an XML standard that allows the use of “boilerplate,” which is text that can be recorded in one file and used repeatedly in many different locations. The policy statements were written to take advantage of this capability, resulting in policy statements that were written to apply to many different elements and may, therefore, be very general. Moreover, changes to boilerplate text must be considered very carefully because of the variety of elements affected.

Organization of presentation

The policy statements follow a consistent presentation of information on each element page: Core statements, general practice statements, and Metadata Guidance documentation (MGD) statements.

For Core elements, the core statement always appears at the Prerecording level and is almost always the very first policy statement to appear on a page.

General policy statements appear next. They may be attached to a section title (e.g., Recording an unstructured description), to an instruction in a paragraph of text, or to options. They rarely appear next to a condition. If a policy statement is attached to a section title or to a condition, it is related to all the options or instructions under that section or grouping of options.

  • General policy statements always appear in the order of LC/PCC practice, LC practice, then PCC practice. Not all policy statements have all three phrases, but when there are different practices that require separate statements, they appear in this order.
  • The three most common policy statements are: Apply the option, Do not apply the option, or Cataloger’s judgment.
  • Other additions to policy statements may include conditions, contingent instructions, and links to other relevant options.

Links to Metadata Guidance documentation (MGDs) appear as policy statements. They always appear last in the order of policy statements. General narrative MGD links appear before specific one-to-one MGD links. The most common location to find links to MGDs is at the Prerecording level; however, they may be linked wherever the content of the MGD seems relevant to the section, option, or instruction.

Core elements

For an effective description of an entity, LC/PCC has designated certain elements as Core. For a full-level record, all Core elements must be recorded if applicable and readily ascertainable. Unless otherwise specified, only one instance of a Core element is required; subsequent instances are optional.

The core statement for an element always appears at the Prerecording level. It is almost always the very first policy statement to appear on a page.

  • If the statement begins with LC/PCC practice, it applies to both LC and PCC catalogers. If the statement begins with LC practice, then only Library of Congress catalogers must apply it. If the statement begins with PCC practice, then only PCC catalogers must apply it.
  • Core: The element is required if applicable and readily ascertainable.
  • Core if: The element is required when specific conditions are met.
  • Core for: The element is required for specific formats.

If there is no Core statement, then the element is optional for LC/PCC. The cataloger may be required to record the element according to institutional policy or best practices from a specialized cataloging community.

Note: An option with the policy statement “Apply the option” guides the cataloger in how to record the element if it is being recorded. “Apply the option” does not indicate that the element is Core.

How to apply options

After deciding to record an element, consider all options and related policy statements to determine how the value for the element should be recorded.

  • If the statement begins with LC/PCC practice, it applies to both LC and PCC catalogers. If the statement begins with LC practice, then only Library of Congress catalogers must apply it. If the statement begins with PCC practice, then only PCC catalogers must apply it.
  • Apply the option: The option should be applied if applicable and readily ascertainable.
  • Apply the option if/when: The option should be applied when specific conditions are met.
  • Cataloger’s judgment: The option can be applied according to the judgment of the cataloger.
  • Do not apply the option: The option should not be applied.

When considering which options to apply, consider the following general guidelines:

  1. Apply options where the policy statements say to “Apply the option”. Apply only those options that are applicable and readily ascertainable, including those that meet the specified conditions.
  2. If the options that should be applied are not applicable or readily ascertainable, apply options where the policy statements indicate “Cataloger’s judgment.”
  3. Optionally, apply options where the policy statements indicate “Cataloger’s judgment” to add to the existing value or to record another value for the element.

For example, some policy statements say to “Apply the option” to “Record an appropriate term from the RDA … vocabulary encoding scheme” and apply “Cataloger’s judgment” to “Record a term from another appropriate vocabulary encoding scheme.” Therefore, a term from the corresponding RDA vocabulary encoding scheme must be recorded if applicable. A term from another vocabulary encoding scheme may be recorded in addition to the RDA term or if there is not an appropriate term in the RDA vocabulary encoding scheme. A term from another vocabulary encoding scheme should not be recorded instead of an appropriate term from the RDA vocabulary encoding scheme.

Applying one or more options

The options in official RDA are written with different underlying assumptions that are not stated. Some options are meant to work together and be applied at the same time. Other options are meant to work in contrast and cannot be applied at the same time. Occasionally, two different options will result in the same value; in those cases, only one of the options needs to be applied. The policy statements try to take account of these differences.

An example of options that are meant to work together is found when recording the element Manifestation: extent of manifestation. When recording the extent for a single volume with numbered pages, several options must be applied at the same time, including options to record the sequence used in the manifestation, to record the number of pages, to record each sequence, and to record the last numbered page of each sequence followed by the appropriate term. In this case, all these options work together to record a single value.

On the other hand, the element Manifestation: title of manifestation provides an example of options that are meant to contrast. There are three options that begin with “Record a title by transcribing text and spoken word content from a manifestation using,” with each option giving a different standard to use: Guidelines on basic transcription, Guidelines on normalized transcription, and any transcription guidelines. Since only one set of transcription guidelines can be applied to a single value, the policy statements clearly state “Do not apply the option” on two of the options and “Apply the option” on the one that is desired.

Sometimes, options that should be applied separately appear to be applied together. When recording the element Manifestation: title proper, the condition “Two or more values of a title appears in sources of information” is followed by two options: “Record the value that appears first” and “Record a value that is the most comprehensive form.” Depending on the source, the value may be the same or it may be necessary to choose between two values. As a result, the policy statements have “if” statements to give preference to apply one of the two options depending on the situation.

Because of how the options and policy statements are written, the cataloger must read the RDA text and the policy statements thoroughly, not just the option that applies to the specific condition. This allows one to understand the necessary options to apply in the context of all the options that are available.

Interaction with other documentation

The policy statements may include links to the RDA text or external documentation, particularly Metadata Guidance documentation (MGDs).

  • If a policy statement links to a specific location in the RDA text, look at both the RDA text and its related policy statement to determine the instruction needed.
  • If a policy statement links to an MGD, consult the MGD for any applicable guidance. Since it is not possible to link to a specific piece of information in an MGD, consider searching within the text of the MGD to find the relevant guidance.

Additional documentation, such as those from specialized cataloging communities, may need to be consulted even if they are not mentioned or linked in the policy statements.

How to provide feedback

LC-PCC Policy Statement and Metadata Guidance documentation (MGD) revisions, questions, and feedback, can be submitted via the PCC RDA Communications Committee Feedback Form.

Grammar, punctuation, spelling, typographical, and link errors in LC-PCC Policy Statements can be submitted via the Error Report Form.

RDA Toolkit Feedback form

Document Date: 2025/06/09
Document: https://access.rdatoolkit.org/en-US_lc_ps_landing