The Content Standard,
US RDA Test,
Your Preparations
Judith A. Kuhagen
Policy and Standards Division, Library of Congress
Special Library Association
Philadelphia -- June 14, 2011
Background and Structure of
RDA
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
2
What’s wrong with AACR?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Increasingly complex
Lack of logical structure
Mixing content and carrier data
Hierarchical relationships missing
Anglo-American centric viewpoint
Written before FRBR
Not enough support for collocation
Before Internet and well-formed metadata
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Based on slide from Ann Chapman, UKOLN
3
1997 International Conference on
the Principles and Future
Development of AACR
• Toronto,
• Principles
Canada
• Content vs. carrier
• JSC invited
• Logical structure of
worldwide experts
AACR
• Issues leading to • Seriality
RDA
• Internationalization
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
4
AACR3
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
5
JSC collaborations
• Metadata groups
– IFLA: models,
principles, ISBD
– ISSN
– ONIX (publishers):
content, etc., types
– Dublin Core, W3C,
IEEE/LOM, Semantic
web: data modeling
– MARBI: MARC
revisions
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
• Library groups, e.g.,
– Law: treaties
– Hebraica: Bible
– Manuscripts and
archives: DACS
– Moving image and
music: AMIM
– Still image: CCO
6
GOALS:
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.)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
7
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) the
successor to the Paris Principles
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
8
General Principles (ICP)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Convenience of user •
Representation
•
Common usage
•
Accuracy
Sufficiency and
necessity
•
Significance
Economy
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Consistency and
Standardization
Integration
Defensible, not
arbitrary
If contradict, take a
defensible, practical
solution.
9
Addresses user tasks
FRBR:
• Find
• Identify
• Select
• Obtain
FRAD:
• Find
• Identify
• Contextualize
• Justify
• ICP’s highest principle = “convenience of
the user”
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
10
FRBR’s Entity-Relationship Model
• Entities
• Relationships
• Attributes (data elements)
relationship
One Entity
Another Entity
• National level required elements
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
11
Work
Person
FRBR’s Entity-Relationship Model
created
was created by
Shakespeare
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Hamlet
12
Terminology
• FRBR & FRAD “attributes” = “elements” in RDA
• FRBR and FRAD Group 1 entities
(bibliographic resources) – aka “WEMI”:
– Work
– Expression
– Manifestation
– Item
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
13
FRBR “Group 1” entities
• “Book”
– Door prop
(item)
– Publication
at bookstore -any copy
(manifestation)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
14
FRBR “Group 1” entities
• “Book”
– Who translated?
(expression)
– Who wrote?
(work)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
15
Group 1
Work
is realized through
Expression
is embodied in
Manifestation
recursive
one
many
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
is exemplified by
Item
16
Family of Works
Equivalent
Descriptive
Derivative
Free
Translation
Edition
Microform
Reproduction
Simultaneous
“Publication”
Abridged
Edition
Copy
Revision
Exact
Reproduction
Translation
Facsimile
Reprint
Original
Work - Same
Expression
Variations
or Versions
Illustrated
Edition
Summary
Abstract Dramatization
Digest
Novelization
Screenplay
Libretto
Casebook
Criticism
Evaluation
Change of Genre
Parody Annotated
Imitation Edition
Expurgated
Edition
Arrangement
Review
Same Style or
Thematic Content
Commentary
Slight
Modification
Adaptation
Same Work –
Cataloging Rules New Work
New Expression
Cut-Off Point
Group 2
Work
FRBR
Expression
Manifestation
Item
is owned by
is produced by
is realized by
is created by
Person
Family
Corporate Body
many
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
18
FRBR Entities
Group 3: Subjects of works
– Groups 1 & 2 plus
– Concept
– Object
– Event
– Place
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
19
Work
Work
has as subject
Expression
Group 3
Manifestation
Item
has as subject
Person
FRBR
Family
Corporate Body
Concept
Object
has as subject
Event
Place
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
many
20
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. French.
LC Control No.
LCCN Permalink
Type of Material
Personal Name
Main Title
Published/Created
Description
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
47023612
http://lccn.loc.gov/47023612
Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
... Hamlet, traduit par André Gide.
[Paris] Gallimard [1946]
2 p. l., 7-237, [2] p. 17 cm.
CALL NUMBER : PR2779.H3 G5Copy 1
-- Request in : Jefferson or Adams Bldg General or
Area Studies Reading Rms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
21
Person
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. French.
LC Control No.
LCCN Permalink
Type of Material
Personal Name
Main Title
Published/Created
Description
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
47023612
Work
http://lccn.loc.gov/47023612
Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
... Hamlet, traduit par André Gide.
[Paris] Gallimard [1946]
2 p. l., 7-237, [2] p. 17 cm.
CALL NUMBER : PR2779.H3 G5Copy 1
-- Request in : Jefferson or Adams Bldg General or
Area Studies Reading Rms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
22
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. French.
LC Control No.
LCCN Permalink
Type of Material
Personal Name
Main Title
Published/Created
Description
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
47023612 Expression
http://lccn.loc.gov/47023612
Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
... Hamlet, traduit par André Gide.
[Paris] Gallimard [1946]
2 p. l., 7-237, [2] p. 17 cm.
CALL NUMBER : PR2779.H3 G5Copy 1
-- Request in : Jefferson or Adams Bldg General or
Area Studies Reading Rms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
23
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. French.
LC Control No.
LCCN Permalink
Type of Material
Personal Name
Main Title
Published/Created
Description
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
47023612
Manifestation
http://lccn.loc.gov/47023612
Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
... Hamlet, traduit par André Gide.
[Paris] Gallimard [1946]
2 p. l., 7-237, [2] p. 17 cm.
CALL NUMBER : PR2779.H3 G5Copy 1
-- Request in : Jefferson or Adams Bldg General or
Area Studies Reading Rms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
24
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. French.
LC Control No.
LCCN Permalink
Type of Material
Personal Name
Main Title
Published/Created
Description
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
47023612
http://lccn.loc.gov/47023612
Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)
Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.
... Hamlet, traduit par André Gide.
[Paris] Gallimard [1946]
Item
2 p. l., 7-237, [2] p. 17 cm.
CALL NUMBER : PR2779.H3 G5Copy 1
-- Request in : Jefferson or Adams Bldg General or
Area Studies Reading Rms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
25
Collocation
Cervantes




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
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Don Quixote
English
Text
Objectives of a catalog:
display
Exemplary
novels
French
German
Spanish
Madrid, 1979
Library of Congress
Copy 1
Green leather binding
26
Relationships
Pathways to Related Works
Cervantes
Wasserman
Movies
…
English
Text
The Man of La Mancha
Don Quixote
Exemplary
novels
French
German
Spanish
Madrid, 1979
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Library of Congress
Copy 1
Green leather binding
27
Databases,
Repositories
VIAF
LCSH
Services
Web front
end
Internet
“Cloud”
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
28
Current Cataloging Environment
• Web-based
• Wide range of information carriers
• More complex content
• Metadata (bibliographic information)
– Created by a wider range of personnel in
and outside libraries
– Sometimes part of the resource
– Element-based metadata schemas
• Dublin Core, ONIX, etc.
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
29
Based on Gordon Dunsire’s slide
Database/format Scenarios
Bib record (flat-file)
Z
666.7
.L55
2009
Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
1 sound disc
Spoken word.
Donated by the author.
1. Metadata
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
30
Based on Gordon Dunsire’s slide
Database/format Scenarios
Bib record (flat-file)
100 01 $a Lee, T. B.
245 00 $a Cataloguing has a future
300
$a 1 sound disc
500
$a Spoken word.
561 1 $a Donated by the author.
650 0 $a Metadata
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
31
Based on Gordon Dunsire’s slide
Database/format Scenarios
FRBR registry (IFLA)
Future
record
FRBR
Bibrecord
record (description)
(flat-file)
Bib
Work
information
record
RDA element registry
Name authority record
Author: Lee, T. B.
Title: Cataloguing has a future
Work title:
has a future
Content type:Cataloguing
Spoken word
Expression
information
Carrier type:
Audio disc
Name:
Identifier: …
Subject authority record
Subject: Metadata
Manifestation
information
Provenance:
Donated by the author
Label:
Identifier: …
RDA content type registry
Item information
ONIX
Label: Spoken word
RDA
LC for SLA RDA (June
2011)carrier
type registry
Identifier: …
32
Linked Data
Work information
Author:
Subject:
Work Title: Cataloguing has a future
Name authority record
Name: Lee, T. B.
Identifier: …
Expression information
Content type:
Manifestation information
Title: Cataloguing has a future
Carrier type:
Item information
Provenance: Donated by the author
RDA carrier type registry
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
Audio disc
Subject authority record
Label: Metadata
Identifier: …
RDA content type registry
Label: Spoken word
Identifier: …
33
Package for Data Sharing
Communication format record
Work information
Author:
Subject:
Work Title: Cataloguing
Cataloguing has
has aa future
future
Expression information
Content type:
Label: Metadata
Title: Cataloguing has a future
Carrier type:
Identifier: …
RDA content type registry
Item information
Provenance: Donated by the author
Audio disc
Name: Lee, T. B.
Identifier: …
Subject authority record
Manifestation information
RDA
LC for SLA RDA (June
2011)carrier
Name authority record
type registry
Label: Spoken word
Identifier: …
34
RDA is a content standard
• Not a display standard (as is 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.)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
35
Mappings, etc., for transition
• RDA Appendix D mappings:
– ISBD to RDA
– MARC 21 bibliographic format to RDA
• RDA Appendix E:
– Presentation and punctuation of access points
– MARC 21 authority format mapping to RDA
• Other mappings in the RDA Toolkit
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
36
Access to RDA
• Online RDA Toolkit -- information at
http://www.rdatoolkit.org/ (also webinars,
blog, training information)
• Printed text version of RDA
• Printed version of the RDA element set
(a subset of the RDA content) in
summer 2011
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
37
Implementation scenarios
• Scenario 3: “Flat file” database structure (no
links)
• Scenario 2: Linked bibliographic and authority
records
1: Relational/object-oriented
 • Scenario
database structure (to get full benefit of RDA)
• Does not mean cataloger creates 4 records
(WEMI) for each resource
• JSC document on scenarios: http://www.rdajsc.org/working2.html#ed-2
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
38
Moving beyond MARC ...
• “Transforming our Bibliographic Framework” - a statement from Deanna Marcum
http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/news/frame
work-051311.html
• “Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative”
-- can join the BIBFRAME list
http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
39
RDA “new and different”
-- an overview
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
40
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
• If a specialized library or collection, supplement
RDA with specialist manuals
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
41
More international
• Focus on local user needs
• Choice of agency preparing the description:
–
–
–
–
–
Language of additions to access points
Language of supplied data
Script and transliteration
Calendar
Numeric system
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
42
Core elements in RDA (not areas)
• Based on attributes mandatory for a national level
record in FRBR and FRAD
• More use of pre-existing data (e.g., ONIX)
• Easier reuse of well-formed metadata
• Core elements listed as a group in RDA 0.6 and
separately in appropriate chapters
– Agency, consortium, etc., can add others
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
43
“Core-ness” identified at element
level in RDA
• If always a core element (if applicable
and available), label CORE ELEMENT
appears below element name
• If use as a core element depends upon
the situation, the label CORE ELEMENT
is followed by an explanation of the
situation
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
44
[Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission
of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library
Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)]
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
45
[Screen image from the RDA Toolkit (www.rdatoolkit.org) used by permission
of the Co-Publishers for RDA (American Library Association, Canadian Library
Association, and CILIP: Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals)]
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
46
Other choices in RDA
• Alternatives and options
• “or” instructions
• “agency preparing …” instructions
If LC implements RDA, LC will reconsider additional
core elements, other choices, and policy decisions.
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
47
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
• Vocabularies being registered on the Web
(http://metadataregistry.org/rdabrowse.htm) -goal of multiple languages and/or scripts
– Want vendors to provide drop-down menus
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
48
RDA Structure
• General introduction
• Identifying elements (entities and their
attributes)
– Ch. 1-7: work, expression, manifestation, item
– Ch. 8-16: person, family, corporate body, place
•
•
•
•
Relationships: ch. 17-22, 24-32
Appendices
Glossary
Index
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
49
RDA structure
• Not by class of materials: no separate
chapters for books, printed music, etc.
– Overarching principles applicable to all
• Basic goals: identify and relate (from
FRBR/FRAD user tasks and ICP)
• Chapters: separate elements for goals
– Assemble those elements when need
authorized access points (instructions at end
of chapters 6, 9-11)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
50
AACR2 to RDA vocabulary
• heading
• author, composer,
etc.
• main entry
• uniform title
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
authorized access point
creator
preferred title + authorized
access point for creator if
appropriate
(1) preferred title (+ other
information to differentiate);
(2) conventional collective
title
51
AACR2 to RDA vocabulary
• see reference
variant access point
• see also reference
authorized access point
for related entity
• physical description
carrier description
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
52
AACR2 to RDA vocabulary
• GMD
media type +
carrier type +
content type
• chief source
preferred sources
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
53
Sources for information expanded
• Fewer categories for sources (RDA 2.2):
#1: Pages, leaves, etc., or images of pages …
#2: Moving images
#3: All other resources
• For almost all elements = entire resource
+ other sources
– Transcribed elements in a preferred order
– Result: less need for square brackets (not
used if resource is not self-describing: a still
image, realia, etc.)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
54
ICP’s representation principle
• Generally, for transcribed information = “Take
what you see” and “accept what you get”
– No abbreviations
– Not deleting information (e.g., in statements of
responsibility, names of publishers)
• Elements recorded rather than transcribed:
may be told to adjust what is found on the
resource or in another source
– A few abbreviations (e.g., duration, dimensions,
jurisdictions as additions in access points)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
55
No more “rule of three”
• When transcribing statements of
responsibility
– Option to give first and summarize others
• When identifying the work
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
56
Statement of responsibility
example
245 $a … / $c by Susan Brown, Melanie
Carlson, Stephen Lindell, Kevin Ott, and
Janet Wilson.
Or, if option applied:
245
$a … / $c by Susan Brown [and four others]
(no longer “[et al.]”)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
57
Example: more than three creators
100
245
*700
*700
*700
*700
$a Brown, Susan.
$a … / $c by Susan Brown, Melanie
Carlson, Stephen Lindell, Kevin Ott,
and Janet Wilson.
$a Carlson, Melanie.
$a Lindell, Stephen.
$a Ott, Kevin.
$a Wilson, Janet.
* number of access points for other creators:
cataloger judgment
AACR2 main entry = title proper
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
58
Replacement for GMD - 245 $h
• Developed with ONIX publishing community:
– Content type -- RDA 6.9 -- MARC 336 field
– Media type -- RDA 3.2 -- MARC 337 field *
– Carrier type -- RDA 3.3 -- MARC 338 field
• Libraries: templates; macros for copy records
• OCLC: constant data records
• SkyRiver: pull-down windows
* not core
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
59
Scope of three elements
• Content type = “fundamental form of communication
in which the content is expressed and the human
sense through which it is intended to be perceived”
• Media type = “a categorization reflecting the general
type of intermediation device required to view, play,
run, etc., the content of a resource”
• Carrier type = “a categorization reflecting the format of
the storage medium and housing of a carrier in
combination with the type of intermediation device
required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a
resource”
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
60
Controlled vocabularies for
content, media, carrier types
• Closed lists in RDA 6.9.1.3, 3.2.1.3, and 3.3.1.3
• If more than one term appropriate, two choices:
– Give all: repeat subfield $a or repeat field
– Pick term representing the predominant or most
substantial content, media, carrier
• If no term appropriate, give “other”; if information
unknown, give “unspecified”
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
61
MARC for content, media, carrier
• In each field (336-338):
– $a: term and/or $b: code
– $2: “rdacontent” or “rdamedia” or “rdacarrier”
as appropriate for $a and $b if using RDA
– $3: materials specified - give if appropriate
• Libraries may use as search limits, display
as icons rather than as terms in fields, or
apply style sheets to use different terms
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
62
MARC 300 $a, 336-338 examples
Book:
300
336
337
338
$a
$a
$a
$a
Music CD:
300
336
337
338
123 pages, 28 unnumbered pages
text $2 rdacontent
unmediated $2 rdamedia
volume $2 rdacarrier
$a
$a
$a
$a
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
1 audio disc
{or: 1 CD}
performed music $2 rdacontent
audio $2 rdamedia
audio disc $2 rdacarrier
63
MARC 300 $a, 336-338 examples
Score:
300
336
337
338
$a
$a
$a
$a
1 vocal score (xii, 300 pages)
notated music $2 rdacontent
unmediated $2 rdamedia
volume $2 rdacarrier
$a
$a
$a
$a
1 map
cartographic image $2 rdacontent
unmediated $2 rdamedia
sheet $2 rdacarrier
Map:
300
336
337
338
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
64
MARC 300 $a, 336-338 examples
DVD:
300 $a 1 DVD
{or: 1 video disc}
336 $a two-dimensional moving image $2
rdacontent
337 $a video $2 rdamedia
338 $a video disc $2 rdacarrier
Online PDF:
300 $a
336 $a
337 $a
338 $a
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
1 online resource (39 pages)
text $2 rdacontent
computer $2 rdamedia
online resource $2 rdacarrier
65
MARC 300 $a, 336-338 examples
Website (with maps, text, and photographs):
300 $a 1 online resource
336 $a text $2 rdacontent
336 $a cartographic image $2 rdacontent
336 $a still image $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $2 rdacarrier
Or can repeat subfield $a in one field:
336 $a text $a cartographic image
$a still image $2 rdacontent
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
66
MARC 300 $a, 336-338 examples
Book with accompanying CD of lecture
300 $a 244 pages ... + $e 1 CD
336 $3 book $a text $2 rdacontent
336 $3 CD $a spoken word $2 rdacontent
337 $3 book $a unmediated $2 rdamedia
337 $3 CD $a audio $2 rdamedia
338 $3 book $a volume $2 rdacarrier
338 $3 CD $ audio disc $2 rdacarrier
Can also give note or can repeat 300 field
300 $a 244 pages ...
300 $a 1 CD ...
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
67
Includes authority data instructions
• Based on attributes and relationships in
FRAD
• Authorized/variant access points and
elements will for now continue to be
documented in authority records
• For works/expressions and Group 2
entities
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
68
Expansion of responsible entities
• Persons: includes fictitious persons if presented
as having responsibility in some way -- not just as
subject
– During US RDA Test: also real non-humans
• Families: important for archives, museums, and
special collections -- may supplement RDA with
specialist manuals (e.g., Describing archives : a
content standard (DACS))
– Also possible for general library materials
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
69
Families: NARs vs. subject headings
• Ch. 10 applies to distinctive family entities
• Continue the current subject cataloging
policy for general family groupings
• Separate authority records will exist in the
LC/NACO Authority File and LCSH
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
70
FRAD Group 2 attributes
• Only some elements used to create
authorized access points
• Others helpful for identifying the entities
• Most attributes represented by separate
fields/subfields in MARC 21 authority
format
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
71
Fields in MARC 21 authority format
for persons (* = not also in 100)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
046:
370:
371:
372:
373:
374:
375:
377:
678:
Special coded dates (RDA 9.3)
Associated place (RDA 9.8-9.11) *
Address (RDA 9.12) *
Field of activity (RDA 9.15)
Affiliation (RDA 9.13) *
Occupation (RDA 9.16)
Gender (RDA 9.7) *
Associated language (RDA 9.14) *
Biographical information (RDA 9.17) *
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
72
Fields in MARC 21 authority format
for families (* = not also in 100)
• 046: Special coded dates (RDA 10.4)
• 370: Associated place (RDA 10.5)
• 376: Family information: e.g. type of family
(RDA 10.3), prominent member (RDA
10.6), hereditary title * (RDA 10.7)
• 678: Family history (RDA 10.8) *
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
73
Fields in MARC 21 authority format
for bodies (* = not also in 11X)
•
•
•
•
•
•
046:
370:
371:
372:
377:
678:
Special coded dates (RDA 11.4)
Associated place (RDA 11.3)
Address (RDA 11.9) *
Field of activity (RDA 11.10) *
Associated language (RDA 11.8) *
Corporate history (RDA 11.11) *
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
74
Relationships, relationships,
relationships!
• 2nd basic goal of RDA = relate
• Linked data will allow us to give more
information about related entities to users
• None are core in RDA but libraries will
need to decide
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
75
Categories of relationships
1. Primary (inherent relationships in FRBR) -cannot express in MARC environment
2. Persons/families/corporate bodies to
resources
3. Resources to other resources
4. Persons/families/corporate bodies to other
persons/families/corporate bodies (authority
data)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
76
Conventions to express relationships
• Persons/families/corporate bodies to
resources:
– Identifier
– Authorized access point
• Works/expressions to other works/
expressions:
– Identifier
– Authorized access point
– Description
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
77
Conventions to express relationships
• Manifestations/items to manifestations/items:
– Identifier
– Description
• Persons/families/corporate bodies to other
persons ...:
– Identifier
– Authorized access point
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
78
Relationship designators
• Optional use when expressing
relationships
• Three appendices (not closed):
– I: Between a person/family/corporate body
and a resource
– J: Between resources
– K: Between a person/family/corporate
body and another person/family/corporate
body [preliminary version]
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
79
U.S. RDA Test
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
80
LC Working Group on the Future of
Bibliographic Control (LCWGFBC)
• Charged to advise LC on how bibliographic control
will evolve and continue to serve libraries and library
users
– How can the library community move forward?
– How can LC move forward?
• Guiding principles
– Redefine bibliographic control
– Redefine the bibliographic universe
– Redefine role of LC
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
81
LCWGFBC on library standards
• The LCWGFBC report On the Record
advocated that improvements be made in the
library standards process:
– Open the process to public scrutiny and
participation
– Test standards prior to implementation
– Whenever possible integrate or correlate
standards with related standards
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
82
2008 national libraries’ decisions
• LC/NAL/NLM agreement in April 2008:
– To support future development and
completion of RDA -- the critical issue was
RDA implementation not development
– A full testing process would occur
– A joint implementation decision following the
testing that would be binding on all three
libraries
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
83
U.S. RDA Test Coordinating
Committee charge
• A decision to implement the rules will be based upon the
positive evaluation of RDA's utility within the library and
information environment, and criteria reflecting the:
– technical,
– operational
– financial implications of the new code
• This will include an articulation of:
– the business case for RDA, including benefits to libraries and
end users
– cost analyses for retraining staff and re-engineering cataloging
processes
– analysis of whether RDA met its self-stated goals
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
84
Assumptions
• Test plans, training documentation, and
results would be shared
• Final version of RDA would be tested (RDA
Toolkit)
• RDA would be tested in existing systems
• RDA data created during test would be made
available for use, reuse, testing, research
• Non-formal testers would be invited to create
and share RDA data and provide their input
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
85
Criteria for evaluation
• General feasibility criteria:
– Can RDA be understood and used easily by
catalogers?
– Can RDA records be used in existing systems?
– Can users find what they seek from RDA
records?
– Can libraries use RDA for access to a broader
range of materials?
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
86
Criteria for evaluation
• Technical feasibility criteria:
– Interoperability of RDA records with current
records
– Identification of needed changes to MARC 21
(or future format schema)
– Ease of integration of RDA Toolkit with other
tools
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
87
Criteria for evaluation
• Financial feasibility criteria:
– Determining cost of training
– Determining cost of any altered workflows
– Determining cost of shifting from
purchased books to subscription service
for cataloging tool and documentation
– Determining conversion costs for existing
data, if necessary to convert
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
88
Test partners
• 26 formal test partners, including LC, NAL,
and NLM
• Partners included a cross-section:
– Types, sizes, formats cataloged, content codes
used
– Libraries, consortia, NACO funnel groups,
educators, vendors
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
89
U.S. RDA Test timeline
• July – September 2010
– Familiarization with RDA content & online functionality
• October – December 2010
– Testers produce records using RDA
• January – March 2011
– LC/NAL/NLM analyze test results
• April – June 2011
– Coordinating Committee prepares report for the
national libraries’ managers
– Senior managers of LC, NAL, and NLM announce a
decision on implementation
– Public report is issued before ALA
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
90
Common Original and
Common Copy Sets
• 25 titles cataloged twice by each institution
but not by same person:
– Once current content code & once RDA
– Range of materials meant that some testers
were cataloging materials they hadn’t cataloged
before
• 5 made-up resources to be copy cataloged
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
91
Extra Original and Extra Copy Sets
• Test partners cataloged materials being
added to their collections using RDA (at
least 25 original records)
• Authority data created if normally done
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
92
8 survey instruments
(3509 surveys received)
•
•
•
•
Record creator profile
4 surveys about test set records
Record use (show RDA records to users)
Institutional questionnaire (management’s
response)
• Informal testers (with or without records)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
93
Common Set records and OCLC
• Common set records should not be
exposed to the community
• OCLC provided temporary institutional
accounts for each testing library
• Master generic records created
– RDA test record A, RDA test record B, etc.
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
94
Authority records:
OCLC and PCC decisions
• How to create RDA records with appropriate
access points without triggering global
updates?
• OK to create new RDA authority records
• Use of 7XX field to record RDA form of
headings in AACR2 record
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
95
RDA records collected
Set
Bibliographic
Authority
Common original set
1514
1226
Common copy set
122
0
Extra set
7786
10184
Extra set records
without surveys
Informal Testers’
Records
Totals
762
1273
386
117
10570
12800
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
96
Record review
• Evaluate records in depth
• Compare AACR 2 and RDA records
• Possible only with Common Original Set:
– Surrogates were available
– Titles were cataloged using both rule sets
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
97
Benchmark records
• Non-testers from national libraries created
AACR 2 + RDA record for each COS title
• National library versions compared;
final versions agreed on by Committee
– For RDA: core + “core plus” versions
– For AACR2: level 2 + PCC practice
– Provided multiple “correct” ways to represent
bibliographic data
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
98
Record review-- data analysis
• Created spreadsheet for each participant for
each Common Original Set title
• Results of each spreadsheet summarized:
–
–
–
–
–
Use of additional fields beyond core
Patterns of errors
Areas where training needed
Areas where rule clarification needed
Areas where community decisions needed
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
99
Non-MARC records
• Common Original Set: 5 Dublin Core
• Extra Original Set
– 25 Dublin Core
– 22 MODS
– 2 EAD
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
100
Record creation times: extra sets
•
•
•
•
Original cataloging
Copy cataloging
Authority work (per title)
For record creators overall, and by category:
–
–
–
–
Professional librarian
Support staff
Student
Other library employee
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
101
Comparative times (COS)
• AACR2 vs. RDA bibliographic record
creation
• AACR2 vs. RDA authority work time
– Authority work per title
• Consultation time
– Bibliographic records
– Authority work
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
102
Data preservation
• Before data clean-up
• Surveys saved in PDF form
• Surveys saved in Excel form
• Available for future research
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
103
Categories of findings
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Community response
Record creation
Record use
Training & documentation needs
Use of RDA Toolkit
RDA content
Systems, metadata, technical feasibility
Local operations
Costs and benefits
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
104
Categories of recommendations
from the Committee
• To senior management at the national
libraries
• To the library & information community
(including PCC)
• To the JSC
• To ALA Publishing
• To vendors
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
105
Orientation: May 2008-March 2010
• Presentations by Barbara Tillett at LC
posted as webcasts for library community:
– Overview of RDA
– Conceptual models: Functional
Requirements for Bibliographic Records and
Functional Requirements for Authority Data
– International Cataloging Principles
– Changes from AACR2
– Information systems and metadata
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
106
Orientation: May 2008-March 2010
• Presentations by Barbara Tillett at LC
posted as webcasts for library community:
– Overview of RDA
– Conceptual models: Functional
Requirements for Bibliographic Records and
Functional Requirements for Authority Data
– International Cataloging Principles
– Changes from AACR2
– Information systems and metadata
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
107
One-day training for testers
• Assumptions for training:
– Experience in cataloging using AACR2
– Used MARC 21 formats
• Scope of training:
– RDA “Core” and “Core if” elements
– What’s different from AACR2
– MARC changes
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
108
Additional documentation from LC
• Examples for RDA compared to AACR2
• “Frequently-asked questions”
• LC’s local training materials + policy
decisions for use by others if desired
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
109
Communication
• Online project management program:
generally questions to the Committee
about the Test procedures (not much
communication among testers)
• [email protected] = email account
available Oct. 1, 2010+
– Questions about RDA from testers and nontesters
– 460+ messages during Oct.-Dec. 2010
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
110
Communication
• Also questions to individuals in LC’s Policy
and Standards Division (PSD)
• Questions to the PCC Secretariat
• Feedback from PSD to testers and nontesters after daily review of RDA authority
records and RDA elements added to
AACR authority records
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
111
Posting of Test records
• Posted on LC RDA Test documentation
site:
– MARC records also available in text versions
– Non-MARC records zipped into folders and
not also converted to text files
– Disclaimer that records had not been
reviewed (although NACO authorities for
Extra set had been reviewed)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
112
Web site for documentation
• Training materials
• Supplementary documents
• Administrative documents, e.g.:
– Policies for use of existing records
– Test procedures
– Records collected
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/rdatest.html
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
113
Recent post-Test PCC actions
• Developing RDA versions of Standard Record
and Provider-Neutral guidelines (exceptions to
RDA just as exceptions to AACR2)
• 3 working groups:
– Additional core elements
– AACR2 forms of headings that are acceptable
RDA forms of authorized access points
– Hybrid records
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
114
Preparing for RDA
-- regardless of the LC/NAL/NLM
decision on implementation
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
115
Implementing RDA?
• If “yes” to that question, need to get ready
• If “no” to that question, still need to get
ready
– RDA bibliographic and authority records in
shared databases & local catalogs
– RDA access points in non-RDA records
• If you don’t know the answer yet, still need
to get ready
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
116
Who needs to get ready?
• You
• Your library colleagues
• Your library’s ILS
• Your library’s users
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
117
How to prepare yourself
1. Become familiar with FRBR and FRAD:
entities, terminology, user tasks
2. Review available training materials and
documentation
3. Explore RDA Toolkit or printed version of
RDA if have access; if not, review last full
draft (caveat: some aspects changed):
http://www.rdatoolkit.org/constituencydraft/
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
118
How to prepare yourself
4. View webcasts/webinars and attend
briefings, workshops, etc.
5. Read books and articles about RDA
6. Talk with cataloging colleagues in your
library: share what you know with each
other
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
119
How to prepare yourself
7. Talk with cataloging colleagues in other
libraries
8. Create RDA practice records
9. Create more RDA practice
records !!
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
120
How to prepare your colleagues
• Staff in all parts of your library
• Tell them what you’ve learned about
FRBR, FRAD, RDA, MARC
– In appropriate levels of detail
– Telling someone else ensures you really do
understand
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
121
Prepare your library: If
implementing RDA
• Make policy decisions with colleagues
from various areas:
– Elements beyond RDA core elements you will
include in own records and accept in copy
records (consult with vendor and consortium
as needed)
– Application of PCC guidelines that are
specific implementations of RDA: CONSER
Standard Record, provider-neutral, etc.
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
122
If implementing RDA:
more policy decisions
• Make policy decisions with colleagues
from various areas:
– Decisions on options and alternatives or
always apply cataloger judgment
– Changes in existing records (e.g., form of
access points, GMD vs. 336-338 fields)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
123
Prepare your library: If not
implementing RDA
• Make policy decisions with colleagues
from various areas:
– Add RDA records from vendors or other
libraries to your catalog for resources in
your collection?
– If adding RDA records, accept with no
changes? If make some changes, what
changes?
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
124
Library system impact if
RDA records in your catalog
• Talk with IT staff and/or vendor to ensure
MARC 21 RDA changes were
implemented (have been issued as
regular MARC updates)
• Make decisions on display and indexing
of new fields in your OPAC
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
125
Training and implementation
• If implementing RDA:
– Develop training materials
– Give demonstrations of the RDA Toolkit
– Review mappings
– Create templates, macros, workflows
– Practice, practice, practice !!!
– Discuss practice/real records
– Foster cataloger judgment (includes
“stamping out tweaking” of others’ records)
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
126
Training and implementation
• If not implementing RDA:
– Explain changes from AACR2 so staff can
understand records in Worldcat, etc. (and
especially if RDA records will be added to
your catalog)
– Explain changes in MARC 21 formats
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
127
Inform your library’s users
• Explain changes in display and indexing
• If your policy is not to change authorized
access points to the same form in all
records, give guidance where forms are
different
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
128
Down the road ...
• Stay informed/investigate:
– Controlled vocabularies on the Web
– Linked data
– Encoding schema successor to MARC 21
• Talk with colleagues in other information
communities (e.g., archives, museums)
• Enjoy exciting challenges and opportunities
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
129
Questions and credits
• After today:
– send questions about this presentation to
[email protected]
– send your RDA questions to
[email protected]
• Thanks
– to Barbara Tillett for FRBR-related slides
– to my U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee
colleagues for Test-related slides
LC for SLA RDA (June 2011)
130
Descargar

What Do You Need to Know? - rda-jsc