getting ready for rda: preparing for the transition rick j. block columbia university
TRANSCRIPT
Getting Ready for RDA: Preparing for the Transition
Rick J. Block
Columbia University
“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)
Deja Vu All Over Again!
• The War of AACR2: Victors or Victims.– Charles Martell. Journal of Academic
Librarianship. Vol. 7. no. 1 (1981)
• The War of AACR2– Michael Gorman. Our Singular Strengths:
Meditations for Librarians
Charles Martell: Suggestions
• Implement user advocacy procedures• Actively involve in all phases of catalog code
development public-service-oriented librarians … as well as computer technologists
• Commission formal studies of catalog use• Commission cost studies in the final stages of
draft revision• Enumerate the benefits to be derived from the
code changes in language that can be understood clearly by the layman
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)
What RDA is intended to be
• A content standard• A set of guidelines• Focused on user tasks (Find, Identify,
Select, Obtain mantra throughout)• An online product (with possible print
“derivatives”)• A more international standard• An effort to make library catalog data play
better in the Web environment
What RDA is intended to be
• Change in view from classes of materials in libraries to elements and relationships for entities in the bibliographic universe
• May be used with many encoding schema such as MODS, MARC, Dublin Core
• An attempt to improve the way we describe and present relationships among resources and bibliographic entities
• Flexible and adaptable
What it is NOT intended to be
• A display or presentation standard
• A metadata schema
• A rigid set of rules
• Structured around ISBD areas and elements
• Instructions on creating and formatting subject headings (yet)
• Instructions on classification numbers
Goals of RDA
• Provide consistent, flexible, and extensible framework for description of all types of resources and all types of content
• Be compatible with internationally established principles, models and standards
• Be usable primarily within the library community, but be capable of adaptation for other communities (e.g. archives and museums)
• Be compatible with descriptions and access points devised using AACR2 in existing catalogs and databases
Goals of RDA
• Written in plain English, and able to be used in other language communities
• Be independent of the format, medium, or system used to store or communicate this data
• Be readily adaptable to newly-emerging database structures
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.
OCLC Webinar Polling Question 1
What one intended benefit of RDA is the most important to your library?
a. RDA will be simpler than AACR2 and cost effective for libraries to implement and use
b. RDA will facilitate future library metadata approaches incorporating machine manipulation of metadata
c. RDA will make library metadata more interoperable and useful in a digital, Web-based world
d. RDA will be more responsive to users’ finding, identifying, selecting and obtaining wanted information from library catalogs and similar tools
e. Some other benefit
OCLC Webinar Polling Question 2
What, if any, steps are you or your library taking toward implementing RDA?
a. Changing our cataloging practices
b. Attending RDA sessions and reading RDA materials
c. Participating in standards work
d. Waiting to see how others proceed
e. Some combination of the above
f. No plans for implementation
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Article by Alison Hitchens (University of Waterloo Library) and Ellen Symons (Queen’s University Library)
• Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 47(8), 691-707.
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• FRBR: Do not assume all catalogers have had opportunity to learn FRBR– RDA includes FRBR terminology– RDA addresses FRBR relationships– RDA uses FRBR tasks as basis for core data
elements
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Vocabulary: Start using new terminology on a daily basis– RDA chapters aligned with FRBR entities and
user tasks– Make sure all catalogers understand meaning
of all FRBR terms– RDA Toolkit does include imbedded glossary– Emphasize that although terminology has
changed, the same information is being used to describe resources
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Structure of RDA vs. AACR– Will be useful to provide an orientation on how RDA is
structured– Dramatically changed from AACR2– Chapters no longer based on format but elements of
description for each FRBR entity– Chapters no longer based on ISBD areas of description– Internal organization of each chapter should also be
highlighted– May want to map commonly used rules from AACR2 to
RDA• Play “where did that rule go?”• RDA includes an AACR2/RDA mapping table
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Rule changes– Experienced catalogers will need to consult
rules frequently and should get back into the habit of looking up rules even for things they know
– Highlight rule changes that affect everyday cataloging
– Changes to MARC should be highlighted
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Options in RDA– Catalogers need to know what to do when
options are encountered in RDA– Three options
• Rules labeled “alternative”• Optional vs. core elements• “If considered to be important for …”
– Library of Congress Policy Statements (LCPSs) replacing LCRIs?
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Options in RDA– Process for defining local options
• Impact on OPAC and discovery tools• Any impact on copy cataloging
– Reliance on catalogers’ judgment• RDA described as “rules to aid cataloger
judgment”
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Update cheat sheets and manuals– Either delete old manuals or bring them up to
date with RDA– References to rule numbers must be changed– This is a good opportunity to review manuals
and training materials– Some cheat sheets may be replaced by
workflow feature of RDA Toolkit
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Training formats– In-house group sessions
• Allow catalogers within an institution to be trained at same time and be at the same level of knowledge of RDA
• First need to train the trainer• RDA Toolkit workflows will aid in training, including “public”
workflows• Trainers will want to create some workflows that will be used
locally• May need to follow up with some one-on-one training
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Other Training formats– Web-based courses– Local/regional/national workshops
• May want to take initiative to organize workshops at the local level
– One-on-one training– Train the trainer
Preparing Catalogers for RDA Training
• Compare RDA to AACR2 • Give concrete examples of how RDA and
AACR2 are different and similar • Provide links to listservs, blogs, and other
sources of good information • Make sure that people understand the new
vocabulary of RDA • Update or create new manuals • Provide step by step concrete examples that
help people learn how to use RDA to do their work
Webinars
• Take advantage of webinars
• Resource Description and Access: Background/Overview. (May 14, 2008. 67 minutes) • http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=4320
• Cataloging Principles and RDA: Resource Description and Access. (June 10, 2008. 49 minutes) • http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=4327
• FRBR: Things You Should Know but Were Afraid to Ask. (March 4, 2009. 57 minutes)
• http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=4554
Webinars
• RDA Toolkit: A Guided Tour– http://www.rdatoolkit.org/training/guidedtour
• RDA And OCLC Webinar– http://www.oclc.org/us/en/news/websessions/recorded.htm
Review
• Library of Congress Documentation for the RDA Test
• http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/rdatest.html
Review
• Adam Schiff’s Changes from AACR2 to RDA: A Comparison of Examples
• http://eprints.rclis.org/18328/1/BCLAPresentation_20100427.pdf
Review
• Barbara Tillett’s Examples for RDA – compared to AACR2
• http://www.loc.gov/acq/conser/rda_examples-rev04-15-2009.pdf
• http://www.columbia.edu/~rjb57/rda_examples.doc
Review
• RDA in MARC
• http://www.loc.gov/marc/RDAinMARC29.html
Thinking Ahead
• Consider budgetary impacts of licensing RDA• Consider budgetary impacts of RDA training• Consider impact on productivity during the
implementation and bedding in period– Do you need to adjust targets?
• Is your system vendor aware of RDA?– Import/export profiles
• 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 do I Need to Learn?
• RDA now outlines the first step in creating a catalog record as deciding on the type of description to be represented, and not deciding on format, although format is still integral
• Types of description (rules 1.2)– Comprehensive, analytical, or multi-level description
• More emphasis on showing bibliographic relationships (e.g., taxonomy of bibliographic relationships) in order to better allow clustering of records– Read--works by B. Tillett, R. Smiraglia, M. Yee
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
• Virtual International Authority File (www.viaf.org)
• Integrate bibliographic data with wider Internet environment– Share data beyond institutions
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
Implementation for RDA Test
• Encoding schema: whatever you’re using now (e.g., MARC 21, Dublin Core)
• Display format: whatever you’re using now (e.g., ISBD)
RDA appendices for transition
• Appendix D mappings:– ISBD to RDA– MARC 21 bibliographic format to RDA
• Appendix E:– Presentation and punctuation of access points– MARC 21 authority format mapping to RDA
RDA Structure
• 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
Procedurally
• Describing the manifestation:– AACR2 part 1 (chapter 1)– RDA chapter 1 decisions:
• What are you cataloging?– Type of description
– Mode of issuance
• General instructions on transcription
– RDA chapter 2, 3:• Sources of information• ISBD elements• Transcription of information from preferred sources
Procedurally
• 245 $a Title proper $b Other title information $c Statement of responsibility relating to title proper
• 250 $a Designation of edition
• 260 $a Place of publication $b Publisher’s name $c Date of publication
• 300 $a Extent
• 500 $a Note on title [and other notes]
Procedurally
• Establishing names for persons, corporate bodies, works, etc.:– AACR2 chapters 22-25– RDA chapter 9: persons
RDA chapter 10: families
RDA chapter 11: corporate bodies
RDA chapter 6: works and expressions– Instructions for
• Recording attributes• Constructing access points
Procedurally
• 100 $a Preferred name for the person $d Date of birth $t Preferred title for the work
• 430 $a Preferred title for the work
• 670 $a Source consulted
• 110 $a Preferred name for the corporate body $b [Subordinate unit]
• 670 $a Source consulted
RDA: New ways of thinking about cataloging
• RDA is an application of the FRBR and FRAD models
• Content vs. carrier• Relationships
– Core relationships• work manifested• creator of the work
– Techniques for expressing relationships• Identifier• access point• Description
– Relationship designators
RDA: New ways of doing cataloging
• Enrich the authority format– Record all the attributes of the person,
corporate body, work, etc., not just names– Record relationships between entities –
including subject relationships to works– Authority record evolves into a record for the
entity
RDA: New ways of doing cataloging
• Create, maintain, and share records for works and expressions
• Link these records to descriptions of manifestations
• Same with records for persons, families, and corporate bodies
• Same with records for subject entities
RDA: New ways of doing cataloging
• Registered vocabularies• Available via the Internet• With persistent resource identifiers• Centrally maintained• Links can be embedded in bibliographic and
authority records• Support and control customized display• Extend registration to entity records for works,
persons, concepts
RDA: New ways of doing cataloging
• New infrastructure for cataloging will develop over time, using the service of registries and Internet protocols for data linking
• RDA represents an initial step– Supports the models for entities and
relationships– Provides a bridge to the new data structures
… getting to the future
• RDA currently stands between the old and the new– Old instructions need to be evaluated and
updated– Models need to be completed [subject entities
and relationships]– Controlled vocabularies, linked data need to
be expanded– New structures for creating, storing, sharing,
and using linked data need to be developed
… waiting for the future
• In the meantime …– Continuity with AACR2
• RDA retains most of the essential provisions of AACR2
– Evolution of MARC 21• MARC 21 changes to support RDA• Migration of MARC itself into an XML-based
standard
– Support of national libraries, shared databases [OCLC], system vendors
… waiting for the future
• And we are ALL waiting for our first look at RDA as an online product
• Tools to support use of RDA– Workflows– Schemas– Shared examples– Integration in vendor workforms
“Top Twelve” things to remember
#1: User needs/user tasks
#2: “Take what you see” (representationprinciple)
#3: “Work, Expression, Manifestation, Item”
– Next slides from RDA Test Training
“Top Twelve” things to remember
#4: “Core” and “Core if …” elements – can
add others (related to #1)
#5: Alternatives, optional omissions, optional additions (related to #1)
“Top Twelve” things to remember
#6: Fewer abbreviations (related to #1 & #2)
#7: Relationships, relationships, relationships
(most beyond core elements)
#8: Content, Media, and Carrier types
“Top Twelve” things to remember
#9: No more “rule of three” – instead, use
cataloger’s judgment
#10: Sources for information expanded
#11: Controlled vocabularies
“Top Twelve” things to remember
#12: Identifying characteristics as building
blocks for future linked data systems
- facilitated by RDA’s structure of
elements, sub-elements, and
element sub-types (for system
designers)
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 Implementation
• ILS: Input templates for cataloging– Listing the elements and links to RDA
guidelines (depends on the ILS vendor)
• Workflows in RDA Online– Step-by-step process with link to RDA
guidelines– RDA Online wizard to create your own
“workflows”– Share “workflows”
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
RDA Toolkit: Misc.
• Take FULL advantage of the open access period (from the RDA launch date in June 2010 through August 31, 2010)– The open-access period will end on August 31, 2010
regardless of the actual launch date – Sign up for mailing list:
• http://www.rdatoolkit.org/rdalist
• Do staff computers need upgrading (it looks like the Toolkit needs a lot of processing power)
• The product itself will aid in the transition
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
Feedback on Creating RDA data
• Mechanisms will be set up for submission of test data to LC– Records for both common set and regular
titles– Survey responses for each regular title
cataloged
Evaluative factors: What do we want to learn?
• Questions to be answered– Level of personnel– Source of answers– Type of answer/data, e.g.,
• Objective• Subjective• Local management decision
Evaluative factors: What do we want to learn?
• Record creation• Record use• Training & documentation needs• Using an online tool• Systems & metadata• Technical feasibility• Workflows• Costs & benefits
What Can You Do
• Follow the progress of the test
• Review test records created
• Create test records locally
• “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
What Should Catalogers Be Doing Right Now?
• Get familiar with FRBR and RDA terminology• Explore the RDA website and other resources—
official and unofficial• Review the training materials for the national test• 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… DON’T PANIC!
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
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
Help!
• http://www.columbia.edu/~rjb57/NOTSL.html