Re: [RDA-L] Feedback on RDA

[Shrader, Tina]

Without taking a position one way or the other on the usability RDA as a 
ruleset or the software ALA has wrapped it in, I'll just say that It's not fair 
to say that there's been no feedback from the library community about the 
content of the RDA instructions.  The content of RDA has been in development 
since 2002, when the Joint Steering Committee began revising AACR2, and there's 
been a lengthy review and comment period after every draft.  The drafts were 
publicly available, and the means of commenting on them were widely publicized 
in the library community as they were happening.

ALA Publishing's handling of the software development and functionality of the 
toolkit is another matter.  I know there was a beta test of the toolkit that 
involved feedback, but that's been a much more restrictive process than the 
development of the rules content was.

Tina Shrader
Cataloging Supervisor & CONSER Coordinator
National Agricultural Library
tina.shra...@ars.usda.gov
Phone: 301-504-5040 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Mills, Deborah
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2010 3:14 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: [RDA-L] Feedback on RDA
> 
> Hi everyone. This is my first time posting to the list, which I joined a 
> couple of
> weeks ago.
> 
> Like many of you, I am struggling to wrap my head around RDA and the toolkit.
> What surprises me is the speed at which it seems to be going through: I 
> haven't
> seen any mention from the powers that be about taking any length of time to
> gather and process feedback after the 2 month preview, and perhaps tweak 
> either
> RDA or the toolkit to reflect changes suggested by users, or things that have 
> been
> flagged that just won't work.
> 
> I agree with a previous poster about the convoluted language being imposed, 
> and
> am dismayed by the response from one of the RDA authors that it is aimed at
> those outside the library world. Firstly, I can't see that the language will 
> be any
> more comprehensible to a non-library trained person, and secondly, if there 
> is so
> much difference to the language used depending on the user of RDA, why not
> have different versions, aimed at different users?
> 
> Deborah Mills
> Cataloguer
> 
> E.P. Taylor Research Library
> Art Gallery of Ontario
> 317 Dundas Street West
> Toronto, Ontario
> Canada   M5T 1G4
> 
> e-mail: deborah_mi...@ago.net
> ph: 416-979-6660 ext. 390
> fax: 416-979-6602