Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
RDA: Cataloging Code for the 21st Century?. Rick J. Block Columbia University. Rick Block On RDA:. “I think it is a disaster. I'm hoping it is never implemented.” Library Journal Nov. 15, 2008. Rick Block On MARC:. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
RDA: Cataloging Code for the 21st Century?
Rick J. Block
Columbia University
Rick Block On RDA:
“I think it is a disaster. I'm hoping it is never implemented.”
Library Journal Nov. 15, 2008
Rick Block On MARC:
Unlike some of his colleagues, he believes the MARC record has a future. He points out the example that Columbia has invested a great deal in it, even in its electronic displays. “We have millions of records in MARC,” says Block, “so I don't think it will go away.”
Library Journal Nov. 15, 2008
Rick Block on ?:
“When I was in library school in the early ’80s, the students weren’t as interesting”
New York Times July 8, 2007
A Hipper Crowd of Shushers
Rhode Island: its neither a road nor an island … discuss
“Still I can not help thinking that the golden age of cataloging is over, and that the difficulties and discussions which have furnished an innocent pleasure to so many will interest them no more. Another lost art.”
Charles A. CutterPreface, 4th ed. Rules for a Dictionary
Catalog (1904)
“Several principles direct the construction of cataloguing codes. The highest is the convenience of the user.”
Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (IFLA, 2009)
RDA: Wikipedia Disambiguation
• Radioactive Dentin Abrasion
• Redland Railway Station
• Recommended Daily Allowance
• Remote Database Access
• Reader's Digest Association
• Retirement Date Announced
Naming the Code
• RDA – an international standard• Took “Anglo-American” out of title
– Even AACR2 used internationally• Translated into 25 different languages• Used in 45 countries outside the U.S.
• Took “Cataloguing” out of title– “Resource description” better understood by metadata
communities– Will still include basic principles of bibliographic
description
Why New Cataloging Rules?
• Feeling that continued revision of AACR2 not sufficient to address issues– Evolving formats, including items that belong
to more than one class of material– Limitations with existing GMDs and SMDs– Integrating resources– Separation of “content” and “carrier” concepts
• Integrate FRBR principles
RDA Big Picture Concepts
• Designed for the digital world
• Founded on AACR
• Informed by FRBR and FRAR
• Consistent, flexible and extensible framework
• Compatible with international principles, models and standards
• Useable outside the library community
Why Not AACR3?
AACR3
Why Not AACR3?
• Reviewers of AACR3 Part I (2004-05) identified areas for improvement:– Proposed structure of rules – too awkward– More metadata-friendly; less library jargon– More connection to FRBR– Modify the connection of the rules to ISBD– Changes need to be significant enough to
merit a new cataloging code, but records still need to be compatible with AACR2
RDA is …
• “RDA is a content standard, not a display standard and not a metadata schema. RDA is a set of guidelines that indicates how to describe a resource, focusing on the pieces of information (or attributes) that a user is most likely to need to know. It also encourages the description of relationships between related resources and between resources and persons or bodies that contributed to creation of that resource.” (Oliver, 2007, Changing to RDA)
RDA will be …
• A new standard for resource description and access
• Designed for the digital world• Optimized for use as an online product• Description and access of all resources
• All types of content and media
• Resulting records usable in the digital environment (Internet, Web OPACs, etc.)
A two-slide history of AACR (1)
• 1967 – AACR 1st ed.
• 1978 – AACR2
• 1988
• 1998
• 2002
• 2005 (last update)
A two-slide history of AACR (2)
Logical structure of AACR2Beyond MARC
What is a
work?
Access points for works Bibliographic
relationships
Content versus carrier
AACR2 & catalogue production
Issues related to seriality
International Conference on the Principles & Future Development of
AACR (1997)
International Conference on the Principles & Future Development of
AACR (1997)
AACR2 Part 11. General2. Books, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets3. Cartographic Materials4. Manuscripts5. Printed Music6. Sound Recordings7. Motion Pictures and Video recordings8. Graphic Materials9. Electronic Resources10. Three-Dimensional Artefacts and Realia11. Microforms12. Continuing Resources13. Analysis
AACR2 Part 11. General2. Books, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets3. Cartographic Materials4. Manuscripts5. Printed Music6. Sound Recordings7. Motion Pictures and Video recordings8. Graphic Materials9. Electronic Resources10. Three-Dimensional Artefacts and Realia11. Microforms12. Continuing Resources13. Analysis14. Podcats
RDA …
• A FRBR-based approach to structuring bibliographic data
• More explicitly machine-friendly linkages (preferably with URIs)
• More emphasis on relationships and roles
• Less reliance on cataloger-created notes and text strings (particularly for identification)
Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR)
• User tasks– Find– Identify– Select– Obtain
• Entity-relationship model– Entities: Group 1, 2, 3– Relationships– Attributes
• National level record elements (mandatory & optional data)
What’s a conceptual model?
• Abstract depiction of the universe of things being described– The things in that universe (entities)
– Identifying characteristics of those entities (attributes/elements)
– The relationships among the entities
FRBR’s Entity-Relationship Model
Pers
on
Shakespearewas created by
created
Hamlet
Wor
k
FRBR Entities
Group 1:Products of intellectual & artistic endeavor = bibliographic resources
–Work–Expression–Manifestation– Item
Vocabulary
• “Book”–Door prop
(item)
–“publication” at bookstore any copy
(manifestation)
Vocabulary
• “Book”–Who translated?
(expression)
–Who wrote?
(work)
Group 1Work
Expression
is realized through
is embodied in
Manifestation
Item
is exemplified by
recursive
one
many
38
Examples1. Leatherbound autographed copy in Rare
Books Collection? 2. Digitized version of the Oxford University
Press text published in 2008?3. French translation?4. London Symphony Orchestra 2005
performance?5. Three Musketeers?
Item
Manifestation
Expression
Expression
Work
Original Work - Same
Expression
Same Work – New Expression
New WorkCataloging Rules Cut-Off Point
DerivativeEquivalent Descriptive
Facsimile
Reprint
ExactReproduction
Copy
MicroformReproduction
Variations or Versions
Translation
Simultaneous“Publication”
Edition
Revision
SlightModification
ExpurgatedEdition
IllustratedEdition
AbridgedEdition
Arrangement
SummaryAbstractDigest
Change of Genre
Adaptation
DramatizationNovelizationScreenplay
Libretto
FreeTranslation
Same Style orThematic Content
Parody
Imitation
Review
Criticism
AnnotatedEdition
Casebook
Evaluation
Commentary
Family of Works
Relationships• Inherent among the
Group 1 entities
• Content relationships among works/expressions
Work
Expression
Manifestation
Item
Whole-Part
AccompanyingSequentialDerivative
41
FRBR Entities
Group 1: Bibliographic resources– Work
– Expression
– Manifestation
– Item
FRBR Entities
Group 2: Those responsible for the intellectual & artistic content = Parties
– Person
– Corporate body
– Family
Work
Expression
Manifestation
Item
Group 2
many
is owned by
is produced by
is realized byis created by
Person
Corporate Body
Family
Subject Relationship
WorkCreated by
Creates Personis subject of
has subject
Concept/Topic
FRBR Entities
Group 3:Subjects of works–Groups 1 & 2 plus–Concept–Object–Event–Place
• Subject relationship
Work Work
Expression
Manifestation
Item
Person Family
Corporate Body
Concept
Object
Event
Place
has as subject
has as subject
has as subject Group 3
many
CollocationBetter organization to catalog
More options to display
» Identifying elements
» Pathways
☑ Simplify cataloging enabling links and re-use of identifying elements
FRBR Benefits
• Objectives of a catalog: display
• All the works associated with a person, etc.
• All the expressions of the same work
• All the manifestations of the same expression
• All items/copies of the same manifestation
Collocation Shakespeare
HamletRomeo andJulietEnglish
French
German
SwedishStockholm2008
Columbia UniversityCopy 1Green leather binding
Pathways to Related Works
Hamlet
Stockholm2008
English
Swedish
French
German
Shakespeare
Columbia UniversityCopy 1Green leather binding
Romeo andJuliet
Stoppard
Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead
Tex
t
Movies…
Derivativ
e
w
orks
Subject
Collocation by Works
• Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. All’s well that ends well As you like it Hamlet Macbeth Midsummer night’s dream …
Collocation by Family of Works and Expressions
• Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet.+ Texts+ Motion Pictures+ Sound Recordings
Collocation by Expressions• Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
Hamlet.+ Texts – Danish+ Texts – Dutch+ Texts – English+ Texts – French+ Texts – Spanish+ Motion Pictures – English+ Sound Recordings - English
Collocation of Manifestations
• Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet.- Motion pictures – English
+ 1964 Director, Bill Collegan+ 1990 Director, Kevin Kline, Kirk Browning+ 1990 Director, Franco Zeffirelli+ 1992 Director, Maria Muat+ 1996 Director, Kenneth Branagh+ 2000 Director, Campbell Scott, Eric
Simonson
FRBR Display - Serial Atlantic monthly
Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1993-) Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1981-1992) Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1971-
1980) Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1932-1970) Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1857-
1931)
FRBR Display - Serial Atlantic monthly
Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1993-) Online Paper Microfilm
Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1981-1992) Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1971-1980) Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1932-1970) Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1857-1931)
Circulation: Place holds at “Work” or “Expression” level rather than only at manifestation level
(VTLS and OCLC demonstrate this)
HamletEnglish
FRBR Benefits
Database/format ScenariosBib record (flat-file)
Author:
Title:
Content type:
Carrier type:
Provenance:
Subject:
Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
Spoken word
Audio disc
Metadata
Donated by the author
Name authority record
Name:
Subject authority record
Identifier: …
Label:
Identifier: …
Bib record (description)
Item information
Manifestation information
Expression information
Work informationFRBR record
RDA content type registry
Label:
Identifier: …
Spoken word
RDA element registry
RDA carrier type registry
Future record
ONIX
FRBR registry
Bas
ed o
n G
ord
on D
unsi
re’s
sl
ide
Work title: Cataloguing has a future
Author:
Title:
Content type:
Carrier type:
Provenance:
Subject:Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
Audio disc
Metadata
Donated by the author
Name authority record
Name:
Subject authority record
Identifier: …
Label:
Identifier: …
Item information
Manifestation information
Expression information
Work information
RDA content type registry
Label:
Identifier: …
Spoken wordRDA carrier type registry
Linked Data
Work Title: Cataloguing has a futureCataloguing has a future
Author:
Title:
Content type:
Carrier type:
Provenance:
Subject:Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
Audio disc
Metadata
Donated by the author
Name authority record
Name:
Subject authority record
Identifier: …
Label:
Identifier: …
Item information
Manifestation information
Expression information
Work information
RDA content type registry
Label:
Identifier: …
Spoken word
RDA carrier type registry
Package for Data Sharing
Lee, T. B.
Metadata
Spoken word
Audio disc
Work Title: Cataloguing has a futureCataloguing has a future
Communication format record
RDA is successor to AACR2
• but is not AACR3 -- RDA is different from AACR2– Next slides from RDA Test Training
RDA based on IFLA’s international models and principles
• Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR; 1998)
• Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD; 2009)
• Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP; 2009)
Addresses user tasks
FRBR:• Find• Identify• Select• Obtain
FRAD:• Find• Identify• Contextualize• Justify
• ICP’s highest principle = “convenience of the user”
Is a content standard
• Not a display standard (as was AACR2)– Does have appendix D for ISBD and appendix E for
AACR2 style for access points
• Not an encoding standard– Use whatever schema you prefer (MARC 21, Dublin
Core, etc.)– MARC 21 used in these training materials (with blank
space around subfield codes for ease in reading)
More international
• Focus on local user needs
• Choice of agency preparing the description:– Language– Script– Calendar– Numeric system
For wider scope of resources
• Response to what’s being acquired in libraries– More elements for non-printed text resources– More elements for non-text resources– More elements for unpublished resources
• Compatible with specialist manuals (DACS, CCO, DCRM(B) etc.)
Includes authority data instructions
• Based on attributes and relationships in FRAD
• Authorized/variant access points and elements will for now be documented in authority records
Has controlled vocabularies
• Only a few closed: content, media, and carrier types; mode of issuance; etc.
• Most are open: cataloger can supply term if needed term not in list
• Some vocabularies being registered on the Web
What’s changing?
• Changes in technology– Impact on descriptive/access data
• book catalogs• card catalogs• OPACs• next generation
• Move from classes of materials to elements and values (more controlled vocabularies)
• Move from individual library to international audience
Internet
• Catalogs are no longer in isolation– Global access to data
• Integrate bibliographic data with wider Internet environment– Share data beyond institutions
Internet “Cloud”
Databases, Repositories
Services
Web frontend
Developed for the future
• When authority and bibliographic data reside in separate “packages”– Records assembled when needed
• When access points (if needed) can be assembled “on the fly”
• When data for works and expressions can be reused for multiple manifestations
Foundations and Influences
• FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records)
• FRAD (Functional Requirements for Authority Data)
• AACR2
• Paris Principles (“Statement of International Cataloguing Principles” 2009 version)
• ISBD (International Standard Bibliographic Description) But RDA does not follow ISBD order and ISBD punctuation is no longer required.
General Principles (ICP)
• Convenience of user
• Representation
• Common usage
• Accuracy
• Sufficiency and necessity
• Significance
• Economy
• Consistency and Standardization
• Integration• Defensible, not
arbitrary
• If contradict, take a defensible, practical solution.
Structure of RDA
• Introduction
• Attributes– Sections 1 to 4 (chapters 1 to 16)
• Relationships – Sections 5 to 10 (chapters 17 to 37)
• Appendices A to M
• Glossary
RDA
• Section 1: Recording manifestation attributes– Ch. 1 General guidelines– Ch. 2 Identifying manifestations and items– Ch. 3 Describing carriers (technical
description)– Ch. 4 Providing acquisition and access
information (terms of availability, etc.)
RDA
• Section 2: Recording attributes of work and expression– Ch. 5 General guidelines (incl. construction of
access points for works and expressions)– Ch. 6 Identifying works and expressions (e.g.
uniform and collective titles, etc.)– Ch. 7 Describing additional attributes of works
and expressions (incl. nature and coverage of content, intended audience, etc.)
RDA
• Section 3: Ch. 8, 9, 10, 11Recording attributes of person, family and corporate body (= name headings)
• Section 4: Ch. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16Recording attributes of concept, object, event and place (= subject headings)
• Section 5: Ch. 17Recording primary relationships between work, expression, manifestation and item
• Section 6: Ch. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Recording relationships to persons, families and corporate bodies associated with a resource
RDA
• Section 7: Ch. 23Recording subject relationships
• Section 8: Ch. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28Recording relationships between works, expressions, manifestations and items
• Section 9: Ch. 29, 30, 31, 32Recording relationships between persons, families and corporate bodies
• Section 10: Ch. 33, 34, 35, 36, 37Recording relationships between concepts, objects, events and places
RDA
• AppendicesA: CapitalisationB: AbbreviationsC: Initial articlesD: Record syntaxes for descriptive data (ISBD, M21, DC)E: Record syntaxes for access point control dataF: Additional instructions on names of personsG: Titles of nobility, rank, etc.H: Conversion of dates to Gregorian calendarJ, K, L, M: Relationship designatorsGlossaryIndex
New Terminology
• AACR2• area• main entry• added entry• uniform title• heading• see references• physical description
• RDA• element• preferred access point
• access point• preferred title for a work
• preferred access point
• variant access point
• describing carriers
Using RDA
• Analyse the resource being described– What is the content type?– Held in what carrier form?– To what other resources is it related?– To which persons, families or corporate
bodies is it related?– To what concepts, events and places is it
related?Ann Chapman UKOLN
One rule for all …
Mostly:• Rules apply to all content types• Rules apply to all media typesWith• Examples of application to specific content and
mediaOccasionally:• Rules apply to specific materials or contents
(e.g. treaties, religious texts, music)Ann Chapman UKOLN
Words, words, words …• Can look opaque or ‘going round in circles’• Trying to avoid reference to specific content and carriers• Hope to improve wording over time
‘Use as the preferred source of information a source forming part of the resource itself that is appropriate to (a) the type of description and (b) the presentation format of the resource.’
Means preferred source of information may vary according to:• Comprehensive or analytical description• Multiple pieces, early print, moving images, or ‘all other materials’
Ann Chapman UKOLN
RDA and beyond
RDA aims to be:
• Independent of communication formats– UNIMARC, MARC, MARCXML, MODS/MADS– DC, EAD, ISBD, VRA, MPEG7
• Compatible / better aligned with other similar standards– Archives: ISAD(G)– Museums: Cataloging Cultural Objects
Ann Chapman UKOLN
Transcription – Principle of Representation in RDA
• “Take what you see” – Correction of inaccuracies elsewhere– No more abbreviating (but take abbreviations
found on the resource)
• Accept what you get– Facilitating automated data capture
– Next Slides from Barbara Tillett. “Sharing Standards for Bibliographic Data Worldwide. June 11, 2009.
Sample Changes from AACR2
• Transcribed data – Option to keep rule of 3
• e.g., [and five others] – no more “… et. al.”
– First place of publication is “core”– Place of publication not identified – not “s.l.”– Publisher not identified – not “s.n.”– Date of publication not identified
Sample Changes from AACR2
• General Material Designator ONIX/RDA (icons?)– Content type
• e.g., notated music, performed music, sounds, spoken word, text, still image, two-dimensional moving image (MARC 336)
– Media type• e.g., audio, computer, microform, projected, unmediated,
video (MARC 337)
– Carrier type• e.g., audio disc, online resource, microfiche, volume, object,
videodisc (MARC 338)
Sample Changes from AACR2
• Access points – Bible– Treaties– No more “Polyglot”– Birth/death dates (no more b. or d.)– More data in authority records
• But– Same as AACR2: Department (not Dept. as in
LCRI)
RDA Elements
• Core
• GMD replacement: Media, Carrier and Content Types
• Other new elements– Custodial information for archival resources– Braille characteristics– File characteristics for digital materials– Video format characteristics
• RDA points towards a new way of thinking about cataloging and new ways of doing cataloging
John Attig RDA: Ready for Take-Off?
Implementation Decisions
• Most of us will use RDA to create bibliographic and authority records encoded in MARC 21 structured according to the ISBD
• For such catalogers, cataloging will not change significantly
MARC
“The electronic embalming of the catalog card.”
--Michael Gorman
“MARC has always been an arcane standard. No other profession uses MARC or anything like it.”
--Roy Tennant
MARC
• “There are only two kinds of people who believe themselves able to read a MARC record without referring to a stack of manuals: a handful of our top catalogers and those on serious drugs.”
• Roy Tennant. MARC Must Die
OCLC: NEW Rec stat: n Entered: 20030207 Replaced: 20030207 Used: 20030207Type: r ELvl: I Srce: d Audn: Ctrl: Lang: dogBLvl: m Form: GPub : Time: nnn MRec: Ctry: mouDesc: a TMat: r Tech: n DtSt: m Dates: 1999,9999 040 $a ZCU $c ZCU 020 $a 101010101 : $c priceless 090 $a SF429.S64 $b R62 1999 092 $a 636.76 $2 21 049 $a ZPSA 245 00 $a Rocky $h [realia] : $b beloved pet / $c raised and loved by Rick Block and Bill Vosburg. 256 $a Shih tzu 260 $a Missouri : $b Farm, $c 1999- 300 $a 1 dog : $b male, black and white, 18 lbs. ; $c 51 x 33 cm. 490 1 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1 650 0 $a Shih tzu. 830 0 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1.
MARC: WoGroFuBiCo
• 3.1.1.1 LC: Recognizing that Z39.2/MARC are no longer fit for the purpose, work with the library and other interested communities to specify and implement a carrier for bibliographic information that is capable of representing the full range of data of interest to libraries, and of facilitating the exchange of such data both within the library community and with related communities.”
MARC:RLG/OCLC Implications of MARC
Tag Usage on Library Metadata Practices
• "5. MARC itself is arguably too ambiguous and insufficiently structured to facilitate machine processing and manipulation." p.27
What about MARC? How will RDA change this standard?
• RDA/MARC Working Group is to propose changes to MARC21 to accommodate encoding of RDA data
• MARC is only one possible encoding schema for RDA data
• RDA online product will include mappings to MARC (current PDF draft has mappings to MARC21 in Appendix D)
• “JSC has gradually backed away from their original stance that RDA could be expressed easily in MARC21”—Diane Hillmann
• Well supported rumors indicate that LC is considering discontinuing update of MARC21 sometime in 2010
What about MARC? How will RDA change this standard?
• We don’t have complete answers about how MARC will change with the adoption of RDA.
• The RDA/MARC Working Group has formed to address these questions:– Under the auspices of the British Library, the Library and Archives
Canada, and the Library of Congress, an RDA/MARC Working Group has been established to collaborate on the development of proposals for changes to the MARC 21 formats to accommodate the encoding of RDA data. With the implementation of RDA anticipated for late 2009, the Working Group will be drafting proposals for review and discussion by the MARC community in June 2008.
– Although the MARC 21 formats support the encoding of descriptions created according to a wide range of content standards, the close relationship between AACR and MARC 21 has contributed to the efficient exchange of information among libraries for decades. The RDA/MARC Working Group will identify what changes are required to MARC 21to support compatibility with RDA and ensure effective data exchange into the future.
• (Taken from an email posted by Marjorie Blossto RDA-L on April 13, 2008.
Future of MARC
• Discussion of the future of MARC is only partially about MARC– The broader digital information landscape– Technologies– Cataloging practices– The diminishing market share of:
• Libraries in the information marketplace• Library catalogs as a resource discovery tool
MARC’s Richness
• Metadata record with approximately 2,000 elements available– Approximately 200 fields– Approximately 1800 subfields or other
structures
• To what extent is the richness/complexity exploited
Library of Congress Study of the North AmericanMARC Records Marketplace
• The Charge:
– to investigate and describe current approaches to the creation and distribution of MARC records in North America
– to focus on the economics of existing practices
– to determine the degree of reliance on LC records
The Findings
There is confusion in the market about the real cost and/or
value of MARC records.
The market provides insufficient incentives to stimulate
additional original cataloging.
The market for cataloging records is genuinely conflicted.
MARC: My Thoughts
• Rumors of MARC’s death have been greatly exaggerated.
• Nevertheless, the “cult of MARC” could keep us from seeing or moving ahead
• It’s not MARC that’s killing us, it’s the record
• The pursuit of the perfect record must end
MARC: My Thoughts
• Librarians have had greatest success with data sharing
• Don’t sweat over MARC• Can re-package MARC data• ILS systems need to gather and display
records: not a lot needs to be done to MARC records
• Not convinced MARC will die either by murder or natural causes … but
MARC: My Thoughts
• MARC does limit our ability to share and exchange data outside of libraries while the creation of metadata outside of libraries is undergoing exponential growth
RDA Database Implementation Scenarios
• RDA is a content standard• RDA is not a display or encoding standard• RDA is not prescriptive as to the data structures that are
used to create, exchange, store or access the metadata• New database structures needed to realize the full
potential of RDA• Improve efficiency of cataloging• Improve searching and browsing for users
– Next Slides from: Rob Walls. “Implementation scenarios, encoding structures and display.”
Flat file database structure
Bibliographic record
NameAuthority record
Holdings/Item record
Name-TitleAuthority record
Linked Bibliographic and Authority Records
Bibliographic record
NameAuthority record
Holdings/Item record
Name-TitleAuthority record
Relational / object-orientated database structure
Manifestation
WorkAccess Point
Control Record
Expression
Holdings/Item
RDA and Dublin Core
• DCMI/RDA Task Group• RDA Element Vocabulary
– RDA metadata entities (elements, attributes)• E.g. “Title”, “Content type”
– RDA value vocabularies (terms)• E.g. “spoken word”, “microform” (media type)
• Enable RDA entities to be used in Semantic Web applications/by computers as well as people
• DC Application Profile for RDA
Bibliographic system changes
• Implement support for new/changed MARC 21 data elements:– Cataloging interface– Record displays– Index definitions for new data elements– Input/verification functions
RDA Online Product: Planned Features
• Browse and Search text (chapters and appendices)• RDA-AACR2 Mappings• Mappings to Dublin Core, ISBD, MARC• Full or Core View options• Workflows and examples for different formats and
types of resources• Links to external resources• Customizable views and settings• Demo from the IFLA Satellite Meeting, August 2008:
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/docs/iflasatellite-20080808-demo.pdf
RDA Toolkit
• Using an online tool (not to be read linearly):– Jumping in via keyword searches– Going directly to elements from Table of
Contents (ToC) pane– Following links– Link between data input screen and RDA– Some duplication of content (needed for
context)
RDA Toolkit
• Customized views– Mode of issuance– Type of content– Shared annotations (e.g., LC/PCC
decisions)
RDA Toolkit
• Workflows—step by step guidance– Basic set provided with RDA Toolkit
• Transcribing an element from a source• Cataloging a simple book
– Build for own needs• Early printed book• Manuscript music• Collection of language material• Direct access electronic programs• Integrating website
RDA Toolkit: Misc.
• There will be a full-text loose-leaf print versions of both Resource Description and Access (RDA) and RDA: Element Set View
• Library of Congress Policy Statements (LCPSs) are being developed by the Policy and Standards Division (PSD) to offer LC test participants guidance on LC policy in the use of the new cataloging code, Resource Description and Access (RDA).– Will coincide with the release of RDA
Testing
• Six months
• Coordinated by U.S. national libraries: LC, NAL, NLM
• Also includes PCC libraries of varying sizes, some archives, ILS vendors, OCLC
• RDA itself and compared to AACR2
Testing
• Feasibility of creating bibliographic data and populating MARC record
• Workflow and time comparison to AACR2• Determination of possible changes to MARC to
accommodate data created using RDA• Financial impact of training, workflow, and workflow
adjustments• Usability: for catalogers, by systems, ability of users
to locate desired information• Co-existence of RDA and AACR2 records• Integration between online product and other tools• System development needed for implementation
Testing
• Initial release of RDA Online will be tested• All methodology, results and data will be shared
and available• Core set of 25 resources including text, AV,
serials and integrating resources• Each institution will create both an RDA record
and a record using their current rules– Different staff members will create the RDA record
and the current rules record• Each institution will produce at least an
additional 25 RDA records
• “The goal of the test is to assure the operational, technical and economic feasibility of RDA … At the very least, the testing may simply reveal that the rules don’t work and thus show us how not to develop cataloging guidelines, which is always a valuable lesson.”
• Shawne Miksa. Resource Description and Access (RDA) and New Research Potentials.
Current Timeline Version ??• Full draft released in PDF November 17, 2008• Comment period on full draft ended February 2, 2009• RDA Online release June 2010• Testing will begin only after RDA is available• Test Days 1-90
– Training period• Test Days 91-180
– Records creation period• Post-Test Days 1-90
– Steering Committee analyzes results• After Post-Test Day 91
– Report is shared with US library community• Implementation?
Once upon a time….penmanship was a required course
Thinking Ahead
• Consider budgetary impacts of licensing RDA• Consider impact on productivity during the
implementation and bedding in period– Do you need to adjust targets?
• Is your system vendor aware of RDA?• Vendors must consider re-design of their
systems in order to incorporate new functionality of bibliographic and authority data
• Are there internal impacts on your catalog?
What Should Catalogers Be Doing Right Now?
• Get familiar with FRBR and RDA terminology• Explore the RDA website and other resources—
official and unofficial• Watch discussion lists and blogs for discussions
and updates• Ask questions, talk with colleagues, participate
in the online discussions• Keep an open mind• Be prepared for change, even if RDA dies• And, most importantly…
Jesse Shera's Two Laws of Cataloguing:
Law #1 No cataloguer will accept the work of any other cataloguer.
Law #2 No cataloguer will accept his/her own work six months after the cataloguing. University of Illinois, Graduate School of Library Science. Dec. 1977.
To err is human.
To find your OWN mistakes before anyone else does…. that is truly divine.
• “You see, I don’t believe that libraries should be drab places where people sit in silence, and that’s been the main reason for our policy of employing wild animals as librarians” – Monty Python skit.
