SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere Nutzervereinbarung und die Datenschutzrichtlinie.
SlideShare verwendet Cookies, um die Funktionalität und Leistungsfähigkeit der Webseite zu verbessern und Ihnen relevante Werbung bereitzustellen. Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter besuchen, erklären Sie sich mit der Verwendung von Cookies auf dieser Seite einverstanden. Lesen Sie bitte unsere unsere Datenschutzrichtlinie und die Nutzervereinbarung.
FRBR, FRAD and RDA I don't speak cataloging why should I care
FRBR, FRAD and RDA : I don’t speak cataloging, why should I care? Presented by Deann Trebbe Technical Services Librarian Grand Canyon University Library at the Arizona Library Association Annual Conference 30 November, 2011 Tucson, Arizona 1Disclaimer: I am not an expert on this subject – far from it – but I am what I would call a next-gen old-school cataloger. Old school because I was trained in the traditional methods, next-genbecause I was then thrust into the world of electronic documents. I attended LibrarySchool at The Catholic University of America in the late 80’s, early 90’s so my catalogingeducation began as I straddled the gap between the card catalogs of old and the OPACs ofthe next generation. I did an internship at the Library of Congress where for 8 hours aweek I would sit in front of a monochrome computer monitor entering MARC recordsfrom a stack of catalog cards.As the Library of Congress goes – so go I, as a cataloger – and so with the nationallibraries decision to implement RDA no sooner than Jan. 2013, I began the seeking theinformation I would need to make the jump at the same time. Here is a compilation ofwhat I have been able to glean so far….
What does it all mean? 2True confessions – I am a recovering United States Marine Musician. Truth be known –I’m not really in recovery at all, I still think like a Marine, act like a Marine and talk like aMarine. And Marines – much like librarians – tend to speak in acronyms. Occasionally atour library staff meetings hilarity occurs (in my mind anyway) when the reference andcurriculum librarians use acronyms that are common knowledge to our library. Forexample, when the curriculum librarian mentions AWS the rest of the staff translate that toAcademic Web Services in their minds. Having spent the bulk of my formative adult yearsin the Marine Corps, I hear Amphibious Warfare School. On the other hand when I startmentioning acronyms like FRBR or RDA I generally get blank stares in return. So Ithought we should start off this morning by exploring some of the acronyms and what theymean before we launch into the discussion of why this is important to start thinking abouthow the library and it’s users will be affected by them.
FRBR = Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records FRAD = Functional Requirements for Authority Records RDA = Resource Description and Access … and lurking around the corner 3Let’s start with some definitions and then we will explore a bit more in-depth.FRBR = Functional Requirements for Bibliographic RecordsFRAD = Functional Requirements for Authority RecordsRDA = Resource Description and Access… and lurking around the corner
FRSAR! FunctionalRequirements for Subject Authority Records 4
What FRBR is not: A set of rules An international standard A system design for online catalogs 5Let’s start with FRBR and what it isn’t:It is not a set of rulesIt is not an international standardIt is not a system design for online catalogsIt can not be implemented because it is conceptual, it doesn’t cover every possible way thatsomething might appear. It says most of the time it looks like this.(Taylor 2007, 4)
What FRBR is …. A conceptual model – based on the entity-attribute- relationship model of analysis Entity = Thing (key object of interest to the user) Attribute = Characteristic RELATIONSHIP = Interaction 6What FRBR is: It is what it is ….So, what is FRBR?FRBR is a conceptual model for the bibliographic universe. The bibliographic what?....The International Cataloging Principles glossary defines Bibliographic universe as “Therealm related to the collections of libraries, archives, museums, and other informationcommunities. *OK – so what does that mean – sounds kind of Star War-ish.*(Source: IFLA Meetings of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code [i.e. thecollective meetings from 2003-2007])”FRBR is an evolving conceptual model describing the bibliographic universe that weorganize and control through cataloging codes. It is designed to help users easily navigatecatalogs and find the material they want, in the form they want it. In addition to the thingslibraries and other institutions might collect. It also includes all people, corporate bodiesor families that might interact with those collections in any way. Including, but notexclusively, authors, owners, producers, etc. It is intended to connect everyone toeverything. It also includes all concepts that might be needed to describe these entities.
Late 1980’s many in the cataloging world … recognized that fundamental changes werehappening in the environment that might require a rethinking of the way we conceive ofand organize information.A 1990 conference in Stockholm, sponsored by the International Federation of LibraryAssociations and Institutions, better known as IFLA, commissioned a study of thefunctions of bibliographic records. The agreed upon core components were to be basednot on the convenience of the cataloger – or on perceived pressure to reduce costs, but onthe needs of users of the records. (Maxwell, 2008, p.2-3)The result is the FRBR model.[FRBR] … will go a long way toward helping untangle the explosion of information that ischaracteristic of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. (Maxwell, 2008)FRBR considers that each work has a unique entry point and from that you can thendescribe that work in its various formats through their relationships and attributes. FRBRand FRAD both are big on relationshipsSome FRBR terms you need to knowEntity = Thing (key objects of interest to user’s of databases)Attibute = characteristicrelationship = interactionEither entities or relationships can have attributesFRBR describes user tasks that serve as criteria to determine which attributes andrelationships are important in bibliographic description
FRBR Entities Group 1 = AACR2 Bibliographic Description WEMI •Work •Expression •Manifestation •Item Group 2 = AACR2 Access points Person and or corporate body Group 3 = AACR2 Subjects •Concept •Object •Event •Place … In other words: Title, author, subject 8 The first group comprises the products of intellectual or artistic endeavour that are named or described in bib records: work, expression, manifestation, and item. The second group comprises those entities responsible for the intellectual or artistic content, the physical production and dissemination, or the custodianship of such products: person and corporate body. The third group comprises an additional set of entities that serve as the subjects of intellectual or artistic endeavour: concept, object, event, and place.(LeGrow, 2010, Taylor 2007, 4-8) J. Bowen writes in FRBR: Coming soon to your Library in the July 2005 issue of LibraryResources and Technical services “Most FRBR entities and attributes are already presentin library catalog records, and the influence of FRBR can also be seen in existing libraryactivities. FRBR is thus not something totally foreign, but a fresh, more rigorous way ofthinking about what libraries already do that provides a basis for designing new ways toimprove users access to library resources.” Bowen, J. FRBR: Coming Soon to Your Library?. Library Resources & Technical Services v. 49 no. 3(July 2005) p. 175-88
9This slide shows the relationships of the Group 1 entities to each other.
Oliver, 2011 10Here are some examples of the links between entities.
FRBR maps the attributes and relationships to user tasks -- find entities that correspond to the user’s stated search criteria -- identify an entity -- select an entity that is appropriate to the user’s needs -- acquire or obtain access to the entity described FRBR Users -- End users of information retrieval systems -- Information workers assisting users -- Information workers maintaining databases (Taylor 2007, 15)11FRBR is all about the user and is based around 4 user tasks-- find entities that correspond to the user’s stated search criteria -- identify an entity -- select an entity that is appropriate to the user’s needs -- acquire or obtain access to the entity describedFRBR Users-- End users of information retrieval systems-- Information workers assisting users-- Information workers maintaining databases
Oliver, 2011 12Let’s put it all together now. From the user’s standpoint.
Oliver, 2011 13From the library staff’s standpoint.
FRBR example 14RDA is on the way! (Le Grow)The FRBR model can be used to present options tousers in a more clear and user-friendly manner. Would it not be easier to see one basic overview record for “Jane Eyre” and choices forversions and availability rather than a long list of records of different editions of Jane Eyrewith not much information on the initial hit list page to differentiate them? U.S. edition (Random House) British edition (Hodder & Stoughton)These are manifestations of the regular print expression Large print editon (Thorndike Press) Large print editon (Chivers Press)These are manifestations of the large print expression Book on CD (Macmillan Audio) Book on CD (Blackstone Audiobooks)These are manifestations of the sound recording expression
15Here is an example of what this might look like in an online catalog. VTLS’s Virtuasystem
What is FRAD? Functional Requirements for Authority Data Like FRBR it is a conceptual Model ◦ Provide a clearly defined structured frame of reference for relating the data that are recorded in authority records to the needs of the users of those records ◦ Assist in an assessment of the potential for international sharing and use of authority data both within the library sector and beyond ◦ Framework for Group 2 entities in FRBR FRBR defines person as “An individual, presumably human, living or dead. 16Functional Requirements for Authority DataLike FRBR it is a conceptual ModelFRAD’s purpose is to(1) Provide a clearly defined structured frame of reference for relating the data that arerecorded in authority records to the needs of the users of those records(2) Assist in an assessment of the potential for international sharing and use of authoritydata both within the library sector and beyondLike FRBR, FRAD models describe the relationships and connections in our bibliographicuniverse that inturn can be used to design systems that will enable users to navigate through this universeto things they need or may like to know about.FRAD is the framework for Group 2 entities in FRBR.
RDA: Describe an entity associated with a resource (a person, family, corporate body, concept, etc.) find identify clarify understand Based on the user tasks defined in IFLA Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data: A Conceptual Model (RDA Toolkit, Introduction) 17The data created using FRAD to describe an entity associated with a resource (a person,family, corporate body, concept, etc.) are designed to assist users performing the followingtasks: *find—i.e., to find information on that entity and on resources associated with the entityidentify—i.e., to confirm that the entity described corresponds to the entity sought, or todistinguish between two or more entities with similar names, etc.clarify—i.e., to clarify the relationship between two or more such entities, or to clarify therelationship between the entity described and a name by which that entity is knownunderstand—i.e., to understand why a particular name or title, or form of name or title, hasbeen chosen as the preferred name or title for the entity.
FRAD: Designed for 2 groups of users: 1. Authority record creators who create and maintain authority files 2. End-users who interact with authority data, directly or indirectly through controlled access points in bibliographic records ◦ Find ◦ Indentify ◦ Contextualize ◦ Justify (Patten, 2007, p. 22) 18Like FRBR, the FRAD model also defines user tasks and maps the entities, attributes andrelationships to those user tasks. The IFLA working group has defined two groups ofusers:(1) Authority record creators who create and maintain authority files (Catalogers!)(2) Users who use authority information either through direct access to authority files orindirectly through the controlled access points(authorized forms references, etc.) incatalogs, national bibliographies, other similar databases, etc. (Everybody else!)
What makes FRAD better than what we already have? A short history borrowed from Ed Jones… 19What makes FRAD better than what we already have? (From the – if it ain’t broke, don’tfix it camp)A short history borrowed from Ed Jones…Yes – that is his real name
Authority records in a card catalog The system guided the user to the resource The system anticipated the user’s missteps The user couldn’t make a typo The user got exercise The system was carbon-neutral Jones, Ed. FRAD : A Personal View, ALA Annaheim, 2008) 20There were some real benefits to the card catalog.[read slide]On the other hand, while users didn’t have to know the cataloging rules, they did need toknow the filing rules—there was no keyword searchingHow has the card catalog worked online?
Online, the card catalog doesn’t work so well Jones, Ed. FRAD : A Personal View, ALA Annaheim, 2008) 21Umm…This is the result of the same search strategy onlineActually, I’ve given the user the benefit of several doubts here: He didn’t look under“Department” and he somehow avoided making a typoThe problem is he looked under the full heading in English, and the system assumed hewould look only under the first element—the name of the university—like in a cardcatalogSo he’s plopped down in limboWe’ve developed some work-arounds in our OPACs, but I wanted to show that ourauthority records are still optimized for the card catalog
Bibliographic entities, names, and controlled access points Džo Šmo (person) ◦ Džo Šmo (name) Šmo, Džo (controlled access point) Džo Šmo (controlled access point) ◦ Josef Schmo (name) Schmo, Josef (controlled access point) Josef Schmo (controlled access point) ◦ Joseph “Jojo” Chmeau (name) Chmeau, Joseph (controlled access point) Chmeau, Jojo (controlled access point) Joseph “Jojo” Chmeau (controlled access point) Jones, Ed. FRAD : A Personal View, ALA Annaheim, 2008) 22Ed used this slide to jump into his next section (he goes into undifferentiated names next –let’s not go there) – I threw it up on the screen because I found it amusing – but it doesserve a point – it shows the FRAD structure. Unless of course you would rather I explainit this way (next slide)We’re used to just seeing the controlled access pointsHere is the person Joe SchmoeAnd here are 3 namesThere’s the one in whatever language and script he wrote in, and there are the two used onthe German and French translations. According to Ed, in France, he was very popular andaffectionately known as “Jojo”
I’m going to ignore this – it’s scary … Jones, Ed. FRAD : A Personal View, ALA 23 Annaheim, 2008)This is from a really nasty section called “Authority Records in the Library Sector” of theFRAD manualI’m going to ignore this – it’s scary(Back up one slide)
Conclusion As the FRBR conceptual model has encouraged us to look at bibliographic records in new ways, so the FRAD model encourages us to look at authority data in new ways Like libraries, these conceptual models are growing organisms Jones, Ed. FRAD : A Personal View, ALA Annaheim, 2008) 24Don’t get excited – this is only the conclusion for FRAD. Ed says: This is my conclusion,because people expect conclusions. I agree with Ed.
RDA Where is my RDA suit? Why do you need it?! (With apologies to Frozone) 25Where is my RDA suit?Why do you need it?!Why do we need a new standard? For that matter do we need standards? Ask any of ourstudents and they will tell you that you can find anything you want through Google.Google is in effect a great big online Union catalog – do we want them setting thestandard? I don’t think so. Here is my take on cataloging standards and why we needthem – and yes – there will be a defense of catalogers included. As a matter of fact – let’sstart there.
Jesse Sheras 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. LeGrow, RDA is on the Way 26I laughed out loud when I first saw this slide – but as I was working out this presentation itoccurred to me that there is a lot of truth in both statements – but there is a reason as well.The information world is spinning at a tremendous rate and along with it the standards arechanging at a tremendous rate of speed just trying to keep up.In the next sequence of slides I will attempt to illustrate for you what this has translated toin my mind as I have labored to draw all of this together in a coherent fashion. It’s allrelated.
This is a cataloger’s brain …. 27This is a catalogers brain – slighty cracked – but sunny and fresh
This is a cataloger’s brain on AACR2 28This is a cataloger’s brain on AACR2Flat file structure – a tad crusty around the edges
This is a cataloger’s brain on RDA 29This is a cataloger’s brain on RDA – scrambled, but if you look hard enough there is apattern to it – and note how the egg white and the yolk have melded into a tasy morsal, andhow the pepper adds definition, making it more palatable to the user – it’s all aboutrelationships!
Jesse Sheras 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. LeGrow, RDA is on the Way 30According to Richard Murray in an article titled “The Whimsy of Cataloging” - Thestereotype of the cataloger is, for many, the hermit hiding in the bowels of the libraryshackled to an OCLC terminal all day, counting pages of plates and measuring the heightsof books. On the rare occasion he or she is let out of the dungeon, it’s to be the one atmeetings who speaks in unintelligible MARC-ese about “non-filing characters” and“second indicator blank” and “space colon space.” The cataloger’s role in the library is toenforce rules that nobody understands and to make things as difficult as possible foreveryone involved. Right?I confess, I do nothing to try to belay that stereotype (it’s fun to mess with the referencelibrarian’s minds).Feb 2002, LIScareer.comCareer Strategies for Librarians
Library Journal, October 15, 2002 MARC Must Die By Roy Tennant, Manager, eScholarship Web & Services Design, California Digital Library. 31When MARC was created, the Beatles were a hot new group and those of us alive at thetime wore really embarrassing clothes and hairstyles. Computers were so large, complex,and expensive that it was ludicrous to think that you would one day have one in yourhome, let alone hold one in the palm of your hand. Although age by itself is not necessarilya sign of technological obsolescence (how much has the wooden pencil improved in thelast 40 years?), when it comes to computer standards it is generally not a good thing.The very nature of the MARC (machine-readable cataloging) record is, to some degree, ananachronism. It was developed in an age when memory, storage, and processing powerwere all rare and expensive commodities. Now they are ubiquitous and cheap.Kelley is a bit more respectful of MARC and less likely to have Henrietta Avram twirlingin her grave. She says MARC was a brilliant, visionary solution in its day, but it wasconceived in different times when the limits of what technology could do were much moreconfining. MARC was designed for an environment where data storage was very, veryexpensive and data was read linearly from tapes.
There ‘s No Catalog Like No Catalog – LITA ALA Annual 2008 The library catalog is the greatest repository of the most “anal retentive, obsessive- compulsive” activity” … ever seen. Anal-retentive, obsessive-compulsive is good for airplane mechanics, carpenters, lawyers, and doctors – but catalogers? Why do cataloger’s have these standards? to save our libraries and our users time and money (Weinheimer 2010, 188-189) 33There are some in the Library world that advocate dumping the catalog altogether. At asession titled – There’s no catalog like no catalog at ALA annual in Anaheim in 2008,One panelist said that the library catalog is the greatest repository of the most “analretentive, obsessive-compulsive” activity” that he has ever seenJames Weinheimer goes on to say that theResponse from audience was embarrassed laughter (although none of the catalogers I wasthere with showed the slightest bit of amusement) but led the author to believe that therewas some sort of general agreement that anal-retentiveness in cataloging was a bad thing.He goes on to make the case that though he sympathizes with the viewpoint, blindadherence to standards is not always such a bad thing, he cites airplane mechanics andhome builders as 2 examples. And continues that while medicine and law are two moreexamples where compliance with standards is a good thing, the same can’t be said ofcatalogers – can it?Legal and health professionals rely on research found through bibliographies and catalogs,and as a result they rely on those who prepare these items to make sure that they are up-to-date and accurate. Errors in information retrieval for a physician or lawyer can put theirclients at risk.
Why do catalogers have these standards? Job security? Secret society? – According toWeinheimer (and Barbara Tillet and the JSC) The reason we have these standards is tosave our libraries and our users time and money(Weinheimer 2010, 188-205) Pop quiz: 6 p. L., -274,  p. incl. front., illus. 22 cm. 274 p. : ill. ; 22 cm. 274 pages : illustrations ; 22 cm. How many cataloger’s does it take to change a lightbulb? (Weinheimer 2010, 189-190) 34Pop quiz: what does this mean|a 6 p. L., -274,  p. |b incl. front., illuse. |c 22 cm.What is the point? This is an example of highly complex pagination and illustration datafrom the physical description field of the MARC record. In the early days of catalogingpeople would include blank pages, the beginnings and endings of pg. Sequences and so on.AACR2 simply cites the final page of each sequence of pages.Weinheimer asks the question – why as a cataloger does he care how the pagination isrecorded and his answer is – he doesn’t care about the minute details of the rules – as longas we are all playing by the same rules. He goes on to point out that when he goes tocatalog a new item – he will check the bibliographic details of existing items in the catalogto make sure he isn’t re-inventing the wheel when he only needs to add a copy to theholdings.
Weinheimer’s conclusion: Library cataloging can provide one thing, and one thing alone, that automatic means cannot, at least not yet: and that is quality. Quality means that some kinds of standards are followed, and that someone using a product that follows those standards, … can safely rely on it.” (Weinheimer, 2010, pg. 203) 35Weinheimers conclusion: “When it comes to metadata libraries cannot provide more,faster, or cheaper metadata in comparison to automatic production because computers canprovide such information in quantities and at speeds that humans cannot hope to challenge.Library cataloging can provide one thing, and one thing alone, that automatic meanscannot, at least not yet: and that is quality. Quality means that some kinds of standards arefollowed, and that someone using a product that follows those standards, whatever thatproduct happens to be – traveling safely in an airplane, or eating Chicken that is free ofdisease, or drinking water that is clean -- can safely rely on it.”
36I’m going to pick on my own catalog here – it’s a work in progress – to point out theimportance of reliable description and access in this case authority control – between thisslide and the next it makes it pretty clear that basing the authors name on how it appears inthe text is not good enough.A search on Mark Twain shows that there are 412 records that match that criteria in thekeyword search. Of those 412 records 291 records are for the author Mark Twain. Noneof these records link to Samuel Longhorn Clemons.
37A search on Samuel Clemens brings up 10 records with the Author Mark Twain and 3records under Samuel Clemens. Where did the other 281 records go and why didn’t these3 show up under a search for Mark Twain?Weinheimer further concludes that these traditional library tasks of description and accessmay be accomplished using completely different methods than those we use today.Enter FRBR, FRAD and RDA!
If you can find it in a library, thank a cataloger! Cataloging codes describe resources in a predictable consistent way The codes build a database that shows our users the organization that we provide to make it easier to find what they are looking for, and to show them related resources in our collections and beyond. This service to our users is our reason for existence as libraries and builds on a long tradition of organizing information (Tillett, 2007) 38So - If you can find it in a library thank a cataloger!In an article titled "High-tech heretic : why computers dont belong in the classroomand other reflections by a computer contrarian" by Clifford Stoll he says"Computerized search engines are no substitute for a well-cataloged library. Librarycatalogers -- perhaps the least thanked of a seldom thanked profession -- add value toalready valuable information. Like indexers, they classify, categorize. And like indexers,theirs is a job thats perceived as easily automated. It aint so. The cataloger interprets.Looks for meaning. Provides context, cross-references, weaves diverse threads into easilyseached end terms."-- From "High-tech heretic : why computers dont belong in the classroom and otherreflections by a computer contrarian" by Clifford Stoll. Page 191 Doubleday 1999. ISBN 0385489757 Cataloging codes provide instructions to catalogers so they can describe resources in a predictable consistent way The codes build a database that shows our users the organization that we provide to make it easier to find what they are looking for, and to show them related resources in our collections and beyond. This service to our users is our reason for existence as libraries and builds on a long tradition of organizing information
The Catalog Then – Emphasis on Books and other printed materials In-between - Microforms, Audio tapes, LP’s video tape, CDs, DVDs, etc. Now - Computer technology Electronic documents Streaming audio & video MP3 & MP4 file formats Future – Who knows …. To infinity … and beyond! 39The Catalog-- development of computer technology and electronic document production presents asignificantly different challenge than libraries had only fifty years ago-- information resources and the libraries that held them still rooted in the era of books andperiodicals-- the card catalog was the entry point to the librarys physical holdings.early cataloging rules, dating back to the catalog of the British Museum in 1841, evolvedprimarily to handle textual, published resources and rules were developed for linearpresentation, either in printed book catalogs or in alphabetically arranged card catalogsHeadings, in alphabetical order, were once the only access points into the catalog.The effect of computers and networks of information resources on the mission of librariesis still being debated, but the very existence of libraries in the future rides on their abilityto respond to todays – and tomorrows – technology.
In 2007 Arlene Taylor wrote that she believes that the solution to the lack of order found inour current catalogs, with the effect of making it difficult for users to sort out what isavailable in the way of versions of a work and other resources related to that work =Combination of 3 thingsAccept principles espoused by FRBRConstruct rules for creating cataloging and other metadata based on this model (RDA)Design systems that will display metadata based on this modelHere are some examples of systems based on the FRBR model WorldCat 40* OCLC’s WorldCat – notice the search facets at the side
41VTLS’s Virtua system – This is our catalog from GCU and notice some of our searchfacets – we have had requests from our ground students to be able to search by the physicalform alone.
42VTLS’s Virtua system - here is another view of a VTLS SaaSP* catalog*Software as a Service
45This one is my favorite as a FRBRized example:OLAC’s (Online Audio-visual catalogers) FRBR-inspired prototype audio-visual“discovery interface” http://blazing-sunset-24.heroku.com
46This slide shows how using FRBR, libraries can inform the users of versions of thatresource on in multiple languages or editions, related resources, works by same creator,same subject, etc.And still provides surrogate to lead users to resources not yet available online, fulfillingthe old role of that catalog as well as the newOLAC’s (Online Audio-visual catalogers) FRBR-inspired prototype audio-visual“discovery interface” http://blazing-sunset-24.heroku.com
The Role of the Library as an extension of the mind Vinod Chachra, Ph.D. http://www.vtls.com/media/en- US/audio/Library_extension_of_mind.mp3 Also available through: Download Vinod Chachra-The Role of the Library as an Extension of ... www.mp3gangster.com/mp3/idc3c49e 3 technologies that represent a million fold multiplication 1. Communications technology 2. Nuclear energy 3. Computers Computers + communications technology (Chachra, 2006) 47Technological advancements can be measured by the multiplier by which human being becomemore productive through the use of certain objects • Technological advancements which have huge impacts are called revolutions • There where 2 major influences on the Agricultural revolution – 2 factors, • (1) the invention of the plow and • (2) the use of chemical fertilizers (100 fold multiplier) • Industrial revolution - Steam engine (1000 fold multiplier) • There are 3 technologies that represent a million fold multiplication • communications technology – wire, wireless etc • Nuclear energy – don’t yet understand full capabilities • ComputersThe evolution of technologies took a major turn with the creation of the Internet. computers +communications technology = Million multiplication of a million multiplier.Library systems developers have worked hard to create a machine-readable library catalog thatprovided functionality beyond that of the analog card catalog (i.e., MARC), for instance byallowing keyword searching of all data in the catalog record. However, the struggle toaccommodate technological change with data created using the old rules is clearly not optimal,and hinders the ability of libraries to create innovative services.
Libraries – designed to remove barriers Spatial barriers Temporal barriers Financial barriers Intellectual barriers New barriers • Discipline independence in a multi disciplinary world • language in a global world • Is literacy necessary in a multi-media world? (Chachra, 2006) 48Libraries – originally designed to remove barriers • Spatial barriers – meeting places • Temporal barriers – don’t need to live during time of author to take advantage of their knowledge • Financial barriers – equality of access • (new rule) Intellectual barriersNew barriers • Discipline independence in a multi disciplinary world – no matter how much we learn about one discipline there will always be some discipline we know nothing about • language in a global world – knowledge not limited to any single language – should not be necessary for us to learn another language in order to cope with the information • Is literacy necessary in a multi-media world – still need a medium of exchange – need to look for solutions and systems that become literacy independent (shouldn’t have to learn exoticlanguage in to have access to information)
• Differences between computers and people (John Gale): • People learn through inference • Human memory fades – computers never forget • Human memory is limited – not so for computers • Humans can visualize – computers pretend to visualize • Humans learn through inference and association leveraging what they learn • Computers are deterministic – people are probabilistic (Chachra, 2006) 49Contrast development of computers with people – develop in opposite ways, the opportunity ofcombining the best of these two things.Symbiotic relationship between computers and people. We are more and more dependant.John Gale sums it up this way: • Differences between computers and people (John Gale): • People learn through inference (accessive learning) (which doesn’t happen in computers yet) and association (imbedded in links) • Human memory fades – computers never forget • Human memory is limited – not so for computers (supposedly) • Humans can visualize – computers pretend to visualize (though that is changing … HAL) • Humans learn through inference and association leveraging what they learn – computers are starting to do this but not as quickly • Computers are deterministic – people are probabilistic • Human memory is like Data • Software can be considered an encoding language • In what way is software similar or different from human DNA
Systems must interconnect and data must expose itself – need to know the content of repositories or databases before you start using it New System Design Considerations Different languages have different scripts and different encoding schemes Indexing and searching tools (like Google) have been written using the Latin alphabet Tools and Rules are still the answer Create high quality data based on how we want the data to be visualized (Chachra, 2006) ) 50The Challenge is to create computer systems that take the best advantage of capabilities ofHumans and combine them with best capabilities of computers to bring about systemswhich allow computers to become an extension of the human mindSimplify processes so extensive training is not necessary (This is something that VTLS hasbeen working at diligently in their system design)Systems must interconnect and data must expose itself – need to know the content ofrepositories or databases before you start using it- Different languages have different scripts and different encoding schemes - Indexing and searching tools (like Google) have been written using the Latin Alphabet - Creates a problem for non-Latin languages because they don’t work - Employing it for different languages is very difficult
- for ex. Thai has no spaces between words – how do you search it? – most search engines depend on word searches – have to create artificial spacesExposing dataHow do we organize the worlds organization and how do we visualize depth and contentof dataGoogle can be described as one big virtual Union Catalog – best model for organizing theworld’s information – not really –why? No standardization – search of FRAD first time on iPhone brought up Fraud. AsVinod pointed out earlier computers do learn – when I was writing this and tried the searchon my work computer I got FRAD, FRBR, FRBR blog (along with a YouTube video of 7minutes of totally inane junvenile commentary called FRAD goes to school, which Ibelieve to be another cry for standards!)Humans don’t want entire dataset – smaller manageable content ( I experienced this to anextent while putting together this presentation – I started out with 515 slides and moreinformation that I haven’t even had time to look at.)One answer to this problem is visualization by segmentation (facets?) exposure – showswhat is in the collection without having to create a complicated search (Chamo – get somescreen shots from our catalog)The answer to the information glot is still Tools and Rules (give user a lot of tools, createsoftware that enforces the rules)Then we the catalogers need to create high quality data based on how we want the data tobe visualized
That being said …..Standing still with AACR2 is not an option if libraries are to remain viable. If not AACR then what? 51We’re at a crucial time for the development of new information systems, more global innature, more Internet oriented, that can make cataloging easier and make the results ofcataloging much more flexible and useful to our users. The Challenge is to createcomputer systems that take the best advantage of capabilities of Humans and combinethem with best capabilities of computers to bring about systems which allow computers tobecome an extension of the human mind
RDA Resource Description & Access 1Resource Description and Access, is designed to help us transition to the technologicalcapabilities of the Internet, today and into the future by having us identify the entities andrelationships at the element level that machines can use better than they have been able toin the past in our MARC records.RDA was originally named AACR3, but after further thought, in order to achieve many ofits goals the title Anglo-American Cataloging Rules was abandoned and a more globalview was taken, which led to the title Resource Description and AccessFrom the start it was meant to build on the Anglo American cataloging traditions, theconceptual models of FRBR and FRAD and the International Cataloging Principles (Tillet2007, 88) The concepts in RDA are not new concepts – they are simply a new view oftraditional cataloging. A new way of looking at the bibliographic universe, usingvocabulary that we hope system designers and future generation of librarians willunderstand. (Tillett, 2007, 88)
What RDA will NOT do… RDA will have NO influence on presently used classification schemes RDA will not change the creation of records at the manifestation level 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.) 53Let’s start again with what it is not:-- RDA will have NO influence on presently used classification schemes. If your libraryused Dewey yesterday – it will still use Dewey tommorrow. The same for LC, NML orany other classification scheme your library may be using.-- RDA will not change the creation of records at the manifestation level but the structureof the new code will be affected by the FRBR user tasksRDA is not an encoding system or a presentation standard for displays. It is schema-neutral. In other words, it doesn’t tell you how to dress up your data or how your datashould communicate – it simply tells you what data is should be recorded to be effective
What are the intended benefits of RDA for libraries and the communities they serve? Rules that are designed to be more flexible and more usable across information communities Rules that are a better fit with emerging technologies, especially sharing data with the publishing community Rules that can support an improved discovery experienceRDA is designed to take advantage of the efficiencies and flexibility in data capture,storage, retrieval, and display made possible with new database technologies, but to becompatible as well with the legacy technologies still used in many resource discoveryapplications.OCLC describes the intended benefitsRules that are designed to be more flexible and more usable across informationcommunitiesRules that are a better fit with emerging technologies, especially sharing data with thepublishing communityRules that can support an improved discovery experienceI thought we did away with Rules ….
RDA provides a set of guidelines and instructions on formulating data to support resource discovery. (RDA Toolkit, Introduction) FRBR: FRAD: Find Find Identify Identify Select Contextualize Obtain Justify • ICP’s highest principle = “convenience of the user” 55It’s more like a guideline.RDA provides a set of guidelines and instructions on formulating data to support resourcediscovery. FRBR provides the conceptual foundation for RDA RDA includes the FRBR terminology Example: the names of bibliographic entities: “work”, “expression”, “manifestation”, and “item”)Responding to those user needs coincides with the main principle stated in the Statementof International Cataloguing Principles: convenience of the user.RDA is a set of practical instructions built on the foundation of a theoreticalframework/modeldata that responds to user needsaccurate dataprecise datausable datavisible dataa standard with an expanded scope
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) RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 56RDA is based on two international conceptual models, FRBR and FRAD, developed byworking groups of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutionswith worldwide input and review. A third model for subject data (FRSAD) has just beenpublished; subject data chapters will be added to RDA in the future.Intended to be a set of instructions for the content of descriptive metadataBibliographic recordAuthority recordOther data structuresStandard for the web environment
Why are the models important? Broad international support for the explanatory power of the models common international language and conceptual understanding of the bibliographic universe as the foundation for a standard: • easier to apply in international context • easier for our data to interoperate with other data generated on the basis of a FRBR/FRAD understanding of the bibliographic universe [Oliver, 2011] 57According to Chris Oliver, there is Broad international support for the explanatory powerof the models and the models provide a common international language and conceptualunderstanding of the bibliographic universe as the foundation for a standard:easier to apply in international contexteasier for our data to interoperate with other data generated on the basis of a FRBR/FRADunderstanding of the bibliographic universeFocus on local user needsChoice of agency preparing the description:Language of additions to access pointsLanguage of supplied dataScript and transliterationCalendarNumeric system
RDA in Europe: making it happen! (8 Aug 2010, Royal Library, Copenhagen) Countries represented Austria Belgium Canada Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Germany Iceland Ireland Italy Netherlands Norway Palestine Poland Spain Sweden Switzerland Tunisia United Kingdom USA 58The next 2 slides give you an idea of the kind of international support that exists for RDA. International interest in the subject of cataloguing 59This slide is from Lynne LeGrow’s presentation RDA is on the Way.
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.) RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 60RDA also covers the wider scope of resources being acquired in libraries today. RDA forgeneral libraries is compatible with specialist manuals for various categories of resources;the JSC (the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA) consulted with thosespecialist communities during the development of RDA.Expanded scopenot just for libraries anymore!-- It connects libraries with other cultural heritage communitiese.g. additions and changes for archives-- instructions designed to describe a wide variety of resources & the possibility for othercommunities to adopt/adapt- release from MARC 21 record format also helps build connections to other communities- awareness of practices and standards in other metadata encoding communities
Importance of relationships Categories: ◦ Persons/families/corporate bodies to resources ◦ Resources to other resources ◦ Person/families/corporate bodies to other persons/families/corporate bodies RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 61Providing relationships is important to meeting the needs of users to tell them what elseconnected to one resource in some way also exists and is available. RDA supports theclustering of bibliographic records to show relationships between works and their creatorsto make us more aware of the works different editions, translations, or physical formats. There are many types of relationships. Those relationships can be explained by the use ofrelationship designators found in three of the RDA appendices. Examples: relationship terms artist abstract of (work) etcher choreography for sponsoring body (work) composer concordance to (work) translator screenplay (work) editor of compilation sequel interviewee finding aid photographer (expression) cartographer libretto (expression) director; producer mirror site former owner reproduced as performer descendants enacting jurisdiction founder employer 62
RDA: A Response to change 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 RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 63RDA is designed for the digital environment. As with other cataloging codes before it,RDA reflects both the technology of the time and the types of materials that we areorganizing, describing, and making available to our users. RDA provides guidelines oncataloguing digital resources and will improve searching and browsing for usersOne of the most significant changes from AACR2 is the move in RDA from AACR2’sclass of materials concepts to identifying elements needed to describe things in order to bemore useful on the Web – we will be moving beyond the library-centric MARC Format tonew ways to share linked data over the Web.RDA recognizes that the value of cataloging data is moving from just an individual libraryto an international audience.
Ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-changes… What’s Different – what’s the same Oh where, Oh where have my LCRI’s gone? LC’s decisions in Library of Congress Policy Statements (LCPSs) available in the RDA Toolkit and as pdfs at http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/rda_lcps.h tml 64Ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-changes…A whole lot of changin’ goin’ on hereLets start with LCRI’s – they are now called Library of Congress Policy StatementsMore new terms comin’ up
AACR2 to RDA vocabulary GMD media type + carrier type + content type preferred sources Chief source Heading, Main entry, Added entry, Authorized Access point heading See references Authorized access point Uniform title Variant access point Elements Preferred access point FRBR attributes 65The GMD, often an inconsistent presentation of different categories of information, hasbeen replaced by three elements: media type, carrier type, and content type. We’ll look atthem later in this section.also note that the change is not only in the term but also that the sources for informationhave been expanded from a single source to multiple sources.Also – we seem to have a pattern emerging in the new vocabulary. It’s all about access!RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010)
ICP representation principle Transcribed information = “Take what you see” and “accept what you get” General guideline at RDA 1.7.1 addresses transcription of what is on the resource: ◦ Capitalization: follow appendix A or accept found form ◦ Punctuation, abbreviations, inaccuracies, symbols, initials, numbering: generally follow what is on source Hairboutique.com 66The International Cataloging Principals principle of representation underlies the changefrom AACR2 generally not to alter what is on the resource when transcribing information.“Take what you see” has becomes our motto. RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010)Most catalogers don’t like this idea.I was thinking what if Marie and Debra Barone were catalogers (Loosely based on episodeHumm Vac (#5.18) (2001))Debra Barone: A clean catalog is not the most important thing in the world.Marie Barone: You know who says that? A messy person.RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010)
Punctuation and Capitalization AACR2 dictated that certain marks of punctuation (such as ellipsis) should be replaced with other marks of punctuation. RDA specifies that punctuation should be transcribed exactly as it appears AACR2 rules of capitalization no longer apply RDA specifies that capitalization should be transcribed exactly as it appears 67Could this lead to ….. Capitalization choices Accepting found capitalization: 245 10 $a Cairo : $b THE CITY VICTORIOUS / $c Max Rodenbeck. 250 ## $a FIRST VINTAGE DEPARTURES EDITION. Changing found capitalization: 245 10 $a Cairo : $b the city victorious / $c Max Rodenbeck. 250 ## $a First Vintage Departures edition. RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 68THIS?!!!!Shown here are two versions of four transcribed elements: the first with capitalization asfound on the resource, the second with capitalization adjusted according to the guidelinesin appendix A. The use or not of uppercase letters does not affect searching and retrieval;many Web applications use uppercase letters.Also note that not adjusting words such as “first” to a numeral and “edition” to anabbreviation are examples of transcribing what you see.
Correcting found errors? Principle of representation (RDA 18.104.22.168): ◦ Don’t correct errors in titles proper of monographs = no more “[sic]” or “[i.e., ___ ]” – give note (246 field in MARC) to explain ◦ Do correct errors in titles proper of serials and integrating resources to have a stable title ◦ Don’t correct errors in other transcribed elements; give note if considered important RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 69The “take what you see” principle applies to errors in transcribed elements.With RDA we will use square brackets only for information not found in the item,regardless of source within the item.With RDA "[sic]" or bracketed additional letters will no longer be used after typos. Create246 with corrected title spellings.We will continue to correct errors in titles proper of serials and integrating resources tohave a stable title.Use cataloger judgment to give a note and/or an access point if important.
An odd bit of punctuation … When an element ends with an abbreviation followed by a full stop or ends with the mark of omission and the punctuation following that element either is or begins with a full stop, include the full stop that constitutes or begins the prescribed punctuation. AACR2 = 250 $a 3rd ed. RDA = 250 $a 3rd ed.. Note: This example assumes that the edition statement appeared on the prescribed source as “3rd ed.”AACR2 1.0C1 says 250 $a 3rd ed.RDA = 250 $a 3rd ed..Note: this is not a change initiated by RDA; appendix D reflects a change in ISBD as ofthe consolidated edition.
Statement of Responsibility 245 00 / $c Sean Markey ... [et al.]. 245 10 / $c Sean Markey, John T. Pierce, Kelly Vodden, and Mark Roseland. Option: [and three others]. 245 10 / $c edited by Ronald W. Waynant ; foreword by the late Dr. Leon Goldman. 245 10 / $c by the Reverend R.M. Dickey ; edited by Art Petersen. Statement of responsibility taken from title page verso 24510 / $c by Edward J. Gregr and Ryan Coatta. (Look Mom! – no brackets!) Schiff, 2010 71In RDA, The ‘Rule of Three’ has been made optional.(The more access the better!) (Le Grow)In AACR2 1.1F7. Include titles and abbreviations of titles of nobility, address, honour,and distinction, initials of societies, qualifications, date(s) of founding, mottoes, etc., instatements of responsibility IF and then it goes on to give a list of what can be usedOtherwise, omit all such data from statements of responsibility. Do not use the mark ofomission.RDA says transcribe what you seeNo more brackets in the statement of responsibility as long as it is somewhere on the item!
Try to supply a probable date whenever possible because not doing so starts a chainreaction of identifying other dates and it’s easier to supply a probable date of publication.If you REALLY cannot supply a probable date and you’re cataloging a single-partmonograph, then give the explanation “[date of publication not identified]”.The last element to be discussed that is encoded in the MARC 260 field is the Copyrightdate. In RDA it is not a type of Date of publication; it is a separate element. To identify itin the 260 $c, precede it with the appropriate symbol. Identifying a person Definition (RDA 8.1.2) = “An individual or an identity established by an individual (either alone or in collaboration with one or more other individuals)” RDA 9.0: Includes fictitious entities (change from AACR2) ◦ Miss Piggy, Snoopy, etc. now in scope if presented as having responsibility in some way for a work, expression, manifestation, or item -- not just as subjects RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 74And finally – I want to talk a little more about new changes in RDA – that is – AuthorityData. We talked about some of this when we went over FRAD – so I promise to be brief.In RDA a person can be an individual or an entity established by one individual alone oran identity established in collaboration with one or more other individuals.I am going to touch briefly on some new things inThe scope statement at RDA 9.0 includes fictitious entities as persons, a change fromAACR2. So, they can now be represented by authorized access points as creators orwhatever role they play if they are presented on the resource as being responsible in someway.
1+ creators: always one in MARC 1XX RDA: 100 $a Brown, Susan. 245 $a Physics / $c by Susan Brown, Melanie Carlson, Stephen Lindell, Kevin Ott, and Janet Wilson. AACR2: no 1XX field if more than three entities. 75In AACR2 if there were more than 3 or if the first named individual was an editor therewould be no 1XX field – straight to 7XX With AACR2 if the work has more than 3 authors, or if the work has 3 authors AND has a collective title, then we use TITLE MAIN ENTRY. With RDA the first author gets the main entry (regardless of how many)
Relationships are important When tracing names in 700 tags we will be using relator terms. (input in a subfield e) These relator terms will be spelled out and not input as abbreviations as they are now. Examples: 700 1 $aSmith, Chester.$esinger 700 1 $aDouglas, Keith.$econductor 700 1 $aManning, Ruth.$eco-author 76Note that these are no longer abbreviated – they are spelled out. (LeGrow)Relationship of person, family, or corporate body to resource being describedRelationship between resourcesRelationship between person, etc., and another person, etc.Can identify type of relationship via designators -- terms in RDA appendices or in othervocabularies Examples: relationship terms artist abstract of (work) etcher choreography for sponsoring body (work) composer concordance to (work) screenplay (work) translator sequel editor of compilation finding aid interviewee (expression) photographer libretto (expression) cartographer mirror site director; producer reproduced as former owner performer descendants enacting jurisdiction founder employer 77
Scope of “family” Now considered creators, contributors, etc. ◦ 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: genealogy newsletters, family reunion publications, etc. RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 78And speaking of relations … Considering families as creators and contributors, not justsubjects, is part of expanding the application of RDA beyond libraries to other informationcommunities such as archives and museums.
Subject headings are being updated Inverted headings are gradually being changed to direct orderExample: Body, human is now Human body Antiquated terms are being updated to modern jargonExample: Cookery will change to Cooking LeGrow, Lynne (2010). RDA is on the way! 79655 Genre headings are usedmore Unlike 650 subject headings which tell the user what the material is ‘about’, genre headings tell the user what the material ‘is’. Examples: 655 7 $aMystery fiction.$2gsafd 655 7 $aEssays.$2lcsh 655 7 $aFilmed operas.$2lcsh LeGrow, Lynne (2010). RDA is on the way! 80
Changes in MARC 21 Can encode RDA content in any schema but many libraries will be using MARC 21 when testing or first implementing RDA RDA/MARC Working Group made proposals for changes to MARC 21 RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 81Remember that RDA content can be encoded in any schema. For the transition to RDA,many libraries will continue to encode their RDA content in MARC.A joint RDA/MARC group wrote discussion papers and made proposals for some changesto the MARC formats to accommodate some, but not all, new RDA elements.
Controlled values, the purpose of 3xx fields : or what have you done with my GMD 82The GMD is being replaced by three new 3XX field which are controlled values fornaming the types of content (like sound, text, still images, and so on), types of carriers(like a film reel, a computer disc, a volume), and other elements in RDA that havecontrolled lists of values- they are already being registered on the Web and can be used topresent displays and show pathways to related resources.I would be lying if I said that this comes as welcome news to a lot of people. Though to befair – outside of the cataloging world I don’t know how many people are actually disturbedby this. Still there will be considerations for the users as well as catalogers and systemdesigners.(Tillett, 2011)
Examples of the GMD (and friends) The sweet hereafter [videorecording] / Alliance Communications presents an Ego Film Arts production ; a film by Atom Egoyan ; screenplay by Atom Egoyan ; produced by Camelia Frieberg and Atom Egoyan ; directed by Atom Egoyan. Rip Van Winkle [electronic resource] : a legend of the Catskills / a comparative arrangement with the Kerr version, by C. Burke. 1850. Get Rich Click! : The Ultimate Guide to Making Money on the Internet [Book on CD] By Cahill, Patrick Published: 2013 Private : #1 Suspect : #1 Suspect [Large Type] By Patterson, James/ Paetro, Maxine Published: 2012 The fiery cross / Compact Disc, by Diana Gabaldon. The Most fabulous classical Christmas album ever! [sound recording]. 10 secrets for success and inner peace by Dyer, Wayne W.... Issued on Playaway, a dedicated audio media player. ... 83For those of you who do not speak cataloging the GMD is the General Material Designatorand here are some examples of what they look like in the catalog
Content type (RDA 6.9; MARC 336) Scope = “fundamental form of communication in which the content is expressed and the human sense through which it is intended to be perceived” ◦ “cartographic image,” “performed music,” “still image,” “text,” etc. For images, also whether in two or three dimensions and presence or absence of movement (e.g., “two-dimensional moving image”) RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 84Content type tells the user how the content of the work is expressed: what form ofcommunication and which human sense is used. Strangely enough it is found in theexpression record.RDA 6.9. Content type (MARC tag 336) is a categorization reflecting the fundamentalform of communication in which the content is expressed and the human sense throughwhich it is intended to be perceived. For content expressed in the form of an image orimages, content type also reflects the number of spatial dimensions in which the content isintended to be perceived and the perceived presence or absence of movement. Values:cartographic dataset; cartographic image; cartographic moving image; cartographictactile image; cartographic tactile three-dimensional form; cartographic three-dimensional form; computer dataset; computer program; notated movement; notatedmusic; performed music; sounds; spoken word; still image; tactile image; tactile notatedmusic; tactile text; tactile three-dimensional form; text; three-dimensional form; three-dimensional moving image; other; unspecified. Each value also has a MARC codeestablished for it that can be used in 336 $b.
Media type (RDA 3.2; MARC 337) Scope = “a categorization reflecting the general type of intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a resource” ◦ “audio,” “projected,” “microform,” “video,” etc. Broad categories; specific types in Carrier type (RDA 3.3) RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 85Media type is a broad categorization of what type of device, if any, is needed to be able tosee, hear, etc., the content of the resource.RDA 3.2. Media type (MARC tag 337) is a categorization reflecting the general type ofintermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a resource. Values inRDA: audio; computer; microform; microscopic; projected; stereographic; unmediated;video; other; unspecified. Each value also has a MARC code established for it that can beused in 337 $b.
Carrier type (RDA 3.3; MARC 338) Scope = “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” ◦ “audio disc,” “computer disc,” “microfiche,” “slide,” “volume,” etc. Don’t confuse with term used in Extent (MARC 300 $a): some terms in common RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 86Carrier type gives more specific information than the Media type term does about the format,housing, and type of device needed if any.The most important thing to remember about Carrier type is that it is a separate element from theelement Extent; Carrier type is given in MARC field 338; Extent is given in MARC 300 subfield$a. The reason it is easy to confuse them is that some of the terms you’ll see in 300 $a are thesame as terms you’ll see in the 338 field.RDA 3.3. Carrier type (MARC tag 338) is a categorization reflecting the format of the storagemedium and housing of a carrier in combination with the type of intermediation device required toview, play, run, etc., the content of a resource. Each value also has a MARC code established for itthat can be used in 338 $b.Audio carriers: audio cartridge; audio cylinder; audio disc; audio roll; audiocassette; audiotapereel; sound-track reelComputer carriers: computer card; computer chip cartridge; computer disc; computer disccartridge; computer tape cartridge; computer tape cassette; computer tape reel; online resourceMicroform carriers: aperture card; microfiche; microfiche cassette; microfilm cartridge; microfilmcassette; microfilm reel; microfilm roll; microfilm slip; microopaqueMicroscopic carriers: microscope slideProjected image carriers: film cartridge; film cassette; film reel; film roll; filmslip; filmstrip;filmstrip cartridge; overhead transparency; slideStereographic carriers: stereograph card; stereograph discUnmediated carriers: card; flipchart; object; roll; sheet; volumeVideo carriers: video cartridge; videocassette; videodisc; videotape reelOther values established: other; unspecified
MARC for content, media, carrier In each field (336-338): ◦ $a: term ◦ $b: code [give $a and/or $b] ◦ $2: “rdacontent” or “rdamedia” or “rdacarrier” as appropriate ◦ $3: materials specified - give if appropriate ◦ Ex. 336 $b txt $2 rdacontent $3 liner notes RDA Essentials (Kuhagen, Nov. 2010) 87In each of the three fields for these elements, the term is recorded in subfield $a; that sameinformation can be given instead in coded form in subfield $b or both subfields $a and $bcan be given.In subfield $2 will be one of the terms as shown; it names the vocabulary used - these arethe terms in MARC identifying the RDA vocabularies. Subfield $3 is used as needed toidentify parts of the resource.
336-338 examples Book: 336 $a text $2 rdacontent 337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia 338 $a volume $2 rdacarrier Music CD: 336 $a performed music $2 rdacontent 337 $a audio $2 rdamedia 338 $a audio disc $2 rdacarrier Score: 336 $a notated music $2 rdacontent 337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia 338 $a volume $2 rdacarrier 88The following slides are examples of how these fields will be formatted.Let’s take a quick look at one example showing the three fields that will be present in atemplate for a book: - the content type in the 336 field is “text” - the media type in the 337 field is “unmediated” because a book does not need adevice for the content to be read - the carrier type is “volume”Remember that the terms in subfield $a are from controlled vocabularies.
336-338 examplesMap: 336 $a cartographic image $2 rdacontent 337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia 338 $a sheet $2 rdacarrierDVD: 336 $a two-dimensional moving image $2 rdacontent 337 $a video $2 rdamedia 338 $a video disc $2 rdacarrierOnline PDF: 336 $a text $2 rdacontent 337 $a computer $2 rdamedia 338 $a online resource $2 rdacarrier 89336-338 examplesWebsite (with maps, text, and photographs): 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 rdacarrierOr subfield $a may be repeated in 336 field: 336 $a text $a cartographic image $a still image $2 rdacontent 90
336-338 examplesWebsite (with maps, text, and photographs): 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 rdacarrierOr subfield $a may be repeated in 336 field: 336 $a text $a cartographic image $a still image $2 rdacontent 90Some live examples from WorldCat 92
Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 95Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 96
Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 97Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute 98
I don’t know if you noticed, but … Life in the cloud! 99There was a lot of linked data in the last couple of slides I showed youSo, let’s talk about Linked Library Data and the Semantic Web.If you will kindly refer back to my disclaimer – it is even truer here. I am not an expert!But, I am game if you are - so here goes…
Dunsire, Gordon (2011). Linked data and the implications for library cataloging. 1001. The first stage was automation. Here, all the metadata from the card have been stored ina computer file. The metadata are separated out into different attributes (or fields or cells)in a regular way; all records have the same set (or sub-set) of attributes. This structure isimplicit in the metadata on the card, where the attributes are indicated by variouspunctuation devices (such as brackets), but not always identified specifically. This type offile is known as a flat-file record, as all the metadata are stored in a monolithic two-dimensional , or flat, structure.2. The flat-file is not an efficient way of storing metadata if there is a lot of repetition ofcontent between records. One area of repetition in library metadata can be found in thenames of persons and organizations; a lot of authors write more than one book, and manydocuments can be produced by organizations in the course of their business. Repetition isminimized by storing a single record, itself also flat-file, containing metadata for theperson or organization. The record is linked to the related bibliographic record using anumerical identifier,. In library terminology, the bibliographic description and nameauthority records are linked via an authority control number3. The same approach works for subject descriptors taken from controlled vocabularies. Asingle subject authority record is linked to many bibliographic descriptions. Note that thecontrol numbers are transparent to humans; instead, he authority headings (name or subjectterm) are displayed on the fly using the link.4. This type of file structure is known as a relational database. The method of storingdescriptive metadata separately from authority headings which act as access points for thedescription began to be implemented in the 1970s, and is used by the majority ofautomated library catalogues today. But a new approach is being developed based on theFunctional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model published in 1998.
Dunsire, Gordon (2011). Linked data and the implications for library cataloging. 1011. In this example, the Work component of the FRBR record does not contain anymetadata content, just the structure in the form of attribute names, and transparent links tothe content of the authority files.2. RDA: resource description and access is the successor to the Anglo-AmericanCataloguing Rules for determining bibliographic record structure and content. It is fullycompatible with FRBR. One of its features is widespread use of controlled terms formetadata content. We can apply the same approach as for authority files, and store thecontrolled terms in their own file, linked to the relevant component of the FRBR record.Content type is one of the RDA attributes using a controlled vocabulary.3. The same for carrier type.4. The provenance attribute in the Item component record refers to the author and is animplicit duplication of some of the content of the author attribute, which is authority-controlled. We can minimize this duplication by refining the provenance attribute into themore specific donor attribute and isolating the author reference as the content of thatattribute. The donor attribute is then linked to the same name authority record as the authorattribute.5. This just leaves the manifestation title within the FRBR record. But we could link theattribute to a publisher or bookseller file of titles …6. And end up with a FRBR record which contains only attribute names and links.The record is reduced to its bare-bones structure, and effectively is extinct.
Dunsire, Gordon (2011). Linked data and the implications for library cataloging. 102Where has the bibliographic record gone? Its content has been completely disaggregated tomultiple records stored elsewhere in the local system or in remote systems. Library ofCongress Subject Headings are already available in a format suitable for this approach,known as linked data. The Virtual International Authority File for names is also availableas linked data. Linked data is the basis of the Semantic Web.The bibliographic record is implicit. The attribute names and links are used to assemble anexplicit record on demand. The metadata content is efficiently stored and maintained (anychange to authority content is immediately reflected in the assembled record). Cataloguesdo not have to store any of the metadata locally just in-case a user needs it; the metadatarecord is presented just-in-time.The current pre-FRBR environment involves huge amounts of duplicated effort withmultiple copies of records being maintained separately at the local level. But we allhave backlogs of new bibliographic resources to describe.
Dunsire, Gordon (2011). Linked data and the implications for library cataloging. 104A quick word about Library namespaces – this will make better sense in a few more slides(hopefully) Dunsire, Gordon (2011). Linked data and the implications for library cataloging. 105This should help as well.
Linked data: The play’s the thing Ed Jones, National University (San Diego) ALA Annual Conference (New Orleans)So now I am going back to Ed Jones, you remember him from the section on FRAD, togive us a whirlwind tour of how RDA plays with the Semantic Web. Ed was asked to talkabout how RDA plays with the SW at ALA annual in New Orleans.This is an excellent presentation and unfortunately I don’t have time to go through thewhole of it now. There is a link to it in my bibliography. I am going to scale it down a lot.–but, hopefully you will get the idea. The playground [Linked open data cloud diagram, by Richard Cyganiak and Anja Jentzsch, http://lod-cloud.net/]So here’s the playgroundDbpedia is popular, as is ACM Who do we play with?
Who we play withOurselves, mostly[Describe]The Germans are well-represented Lobid = North Rhine Westphalia Library Services Center (German) PSH = Polymathic Structured Subject Headings (Czech) P20 = 20th Century Press Archives (German) But if we’re going to look at how we play, we’re going to need some playground rules…
Ranganathan’s first law of linked data: Data is for use [or, for the true die-hard, Data are for use] Playground rulesSo I have 1 playground rule and 2 corollariesThis seems pretty straightforward, but then so did Books are for use, and we’re still tryingto come to grips with that one and there are useful corollaries to this law …