1. Cataloging Landscape
Update
RDA and LC Working Group on the
Future of Bibliographic Control
Diane Baden
April 2008

2. Outline
LC Working Group Report
Background
Why, Who, When, How
What next
RDA update

3. Background:
LC Bicentennial Conference
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/

4. LC Bicentennial Conference
(November 2000): Action Plan
1. Increase the availability of standard records for selected Web
resources.
2. Enhance the access to and display of records for selected Web
resources across multiple systems.
3. Work collaboratively with metadata standards communities to
improve bibliographic control of selected Web resources.
4. Develop automated tools for extracting, creating, harvesting
and maintaining metadata to improve bibliographic control of
selected Web resources.
5. Provide appropriate training/continuing education to improve
bibliographic control of selected Web resources.
6. Support research and development on emerging metadata
standards and address the challenges of interoperability to
improve bibliographic control of selected Web resources.

5. Background: Reports
University of California: Rethinking How We Provide Bibliographic
Services for the University of California (Dec. 2005)
http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final.pdf
Indiana University: A White Paper on the Future of Cataloging at
Indiana University (Jan. 2006)
http://www.iub.edu/~libtserv/pub/Future_of_Cataloging_White_Paper.pdf
Karen Calhoun: The Changing Nature of the Catalog and its
Integration with Other Discovery Tools (March 2006)
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf

6. Background: Series
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/series.html
LC announces in April 2006 decision to
cease creating series authority records
No prior consultation or warning to library
community
Most LC series will be analyzed, classified
separately, not traced (490)

7. Background:
LC Subject Headings
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/pre_vs_post.html
CPSO study on the use of pre-coordination in LCSH
Recommendation to continue and simplify
Creation of pre-coordinated authority records for
machine manipulation
Proposal to make LCSH freely available on the Web

8. LC Strategic Plan 2008-2013
Goal: Expand and preserve in accessible
form a unified and universal body of
knowledge and creativity.
Goal: Improve our internal and external
customers’ experiences in seamlessly finding
and using Library resources.
Focus on digital resources, preservation,
access to unique collections

9. LC Working Group on the
Future of Bibliographic Control
http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/
Charge:
Present findings on how bibliographic control and other
descriptive practices can effectively support management
of and access to library materials in the evolving
information and technology environment
Recommend ways in which the library community can
collectively move toward achieving this vision
Advise the Library of Congress on its roles and priorities

11. Meetings and Reports
November 2-3, 2006: Inaugural meeting
March 8, 2007: Users and Uses of Bibliographic
Data
May 9, 2007: Structures and Standards for
Bibliographic Data
July 9, 2007: Economics and Organization of
Bibliographic Data
November 13, 2007: Draft report
January 10, 2008: Final report

12. Public Participation
Background papers
Written comments
Public responses
Summaries
Webcasts

13. Introduction
“The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative,
decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its
realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector,
and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be
gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly;
and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The
underlying technology that makes this future possible and
necessary—the World Wide Web—is now almost two
decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this
future without delay in order to retain their significance as
information providers.”

14. Guiding Principles
Redefine bibliographic control
Beyond cataloging, distributed, connected
Redefine the bibliographic universe
Commercial, web-enabled, international
Redefine the role of the Library of Congress
Not the national library

15. Themes
Economics: return on investment, incentives
Standards: web, metadata
Cooperation: vendors, publishers, international
Collaboration: dividing the work
Users: different needs, levels of access, search
strategies
“Discovery happens in places not created or controlled by
libraries”—Bob Wolven, Columbia
Research: more, faster, practical (value)

16. Recommendations
1. Increase efficiency of bibliographic production and
maintenance
2. Enhance access to rare, unique, and other special
hidden materials
3. Position technology for the future
4. Position community for the future
5. Strengthen library and information science
profession

17. Recommendation 1:
Efficient Bibliographic Production
Eliminate redundancies
Distribute responsibility for bibliographic
record production
Collaborate on authority record creation and
maintenance
Automation and batch manipulation

18. Recommendation 2:
Access to Special Collections
Priority to cataloging rare and unique
materials
Integrate access tools (finding aids, etc.)
Digitize for broader access

19. Recommendation 3:
Future Technology
Web as infrastructure
Improve standards development process
Evaluate standards for ROI (make business
case for RDA)

20. Recommendation 4:
Position for the Future
Design for multiple users (people, vendors,
systems)
Test and implement FRBR
Optimize and simplify LCSH

21. Recommendation 5:
Strengthen LIS Profession
Build an evidence base to provide data
Design LIS education for future needs
Share educational materials freely online
Develop sustainable continuing education
program

22. Deanna Marcum at ALA Midwinter
New ideas in report
Incentives for sharing bibliographic data
Examine economic models
Internationalize authority files
Controversial recommendations
Priority to special collections
More flexible metadata carrier (not MARC)
Standards focus on ROI
Suspend work on RDA

23. What Next for LC?
LC forming groups to analyze and make recommendations
Adopt now
Adopt later
Study more
Do not adopt
Pledge
Respond in writing publicly to every recommendation by ALA
Annual 2008
Consult with library community about implications
Meet periodically with Working Group to discuss progress
Include a timetable and implementation plans in strategic plan

24. What Next for Us?
Many recommendations assigned to “All”
PCC
OCLC
WorldCat Local
Next Generation pilot: ONIX-MARC
ALCTS Task Group on the LC Working Group
Report
Lobby for increased funding for LC?

25. RDA Update
Current status
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/
LC plans
Implementation timeline
Getting ready

26. RDA: Current Status
Work proceeding
Committee of Principals (CoP) affirming support and
coordinated implementation
Reorganization to align with FRBR model (user
tasks, entities, attributes, relationships)
Drafts out for comment
DCMI/RDA Task Force
RDA/MARC Working Group

27. RDA: LC Plans
Currently on hold pending analysis of
recommendations in LCWG Report
CoP encourages LC to continue work
Joint Steering Committee meeting in April

28. RDA: Implementation Timeline
Full draft: July 2008
First release: early 2009
Online prototype in early testing
Implementation: late 2009

29. RDA: Getting Ready
RDA Update Forums (ALA)
ALCTS/CCS RDA Implementation Task Force
FRBR and FRAD
Monitor lists and blogs
AUTOCAT
RDA-L
http://www.mail-archive.com/rda-l@infoserv.nlc-
bnc.ca/maillist.html
Training

30. “Future of Cataloging”
Christine Schwartz, Cataloging Futures blog,
recently summarized Roy Tennant's article, The
New Cataloger, from 2006. He described what the
future tasks of catalogers might look like:
Working with a variety of non-MARC metadata
Working with new cataloging tools
Harvesting, the automated gathering of metadata
Normalizing and enriching batches of metadata
Quality control of automated processes

31. My Questions/Thoughts
Staffing
Past trend: fewer professionals, more support staff
Now: easy tasks automated; controlled vocabularies,
metadata, original cataloging of rare materials, data
manipulation, etc., need higher skills
Economics
What is incentive for vendors to share proprietary data?
Who will supply “incentives” in report for more
collaboration?
What will be the cost to individual libraries of LC’s
withdrawal?

32. My Questions/Thoughts
Who will coordinate all this collaboration?
Future of the ILS
Relationships, collections: it’s not about
individual catalog records

33. Your Questions and Thoughts!