[RDA-L] Fwd: Letter from Deanna Marcum and Joint Statement on RDA
[Forwarded with permission] May 1, 2008 Dear Colleagues, The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control submitted its final report, On the Record , to me on January 9, 2008. I have distributed the document to three groups within the Library of Congress for analysis and comment. I expect to respond formally to the report in early June. On the Record contains more than one hundred recommendations aimed at the Library of Congress, other specific organizations and entities, and to the broader library community. In the words of the members of the Working Group, they envision a future for bibliographic control that will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-basedÂ…change will happen quickly, and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The group urged the readers of the report to view it as a 'call to action' that informs and broadens participation in discussion and debate, conveys a sense of urgency, stimulates collaboration, and catalyzes thoughtful and deliberative action. The many recommendations suggest ways in which the necessary systemic change can take place. When the Library of Congress issues its response, we will be focusing on how it will position itself to work in this new, networked, and collaborative environment, not simply on single recommendations. We recognize that any cataloging code (AACR2 or the proposed Resource Description and Access--RDA) is but a part of this environment. It may seem counterintuitive that we issue a joint statement with our colleagues from the National Agricultural Library and the National Library of Medicine on RDA before we issue a full response to On the Record , but we do so because the international Joint Steering Committee and the Committee of Principals continue their work, and because so many librarians are asking about the national libraries' plans to implement the proposed code. We are pleased to report that we three libraries have worked together to establish an approach to the consideration of RDA in the attached joint statement. We ask that you bear in mind that it is the entire bibliographic system that needs to be considered and reworked, and the cataloging code is only one small piece of the work that lies ahead. Sincerely, Deanna B. Marcum Associate Librarian for Library Services The Library of Congress Joint Statement of the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Agricultural Library on Resource Description and Access May 1, 2008 Leaders of the Library of Congress (LC), the National Library of Medicine (NLM), and the National Agricultural Library (NAL) met on March 10, 2008 to discuss the recommendation from On the Record: the Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control to suspend work on RDA. The group agreed that the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA's work on Resource Description and Access (RDA) is an important international initiative that has been underway for several years and is one that requires continued collaboration with our international partners who have joined with the United States in a global initiative to update bibliographic practices to make the library resources more accessible and useful to users. The participants also agreed that their decisions whether or not to implement this new standard must be made jointly. Further, participants agreed that LC, NLM, and NAL have collective leadership responsibilities to assist the U.S. library and information community to remain relevant and vital in an increasingly digital future. Key to this role is providing a broad assessment and commitment to RDA if they believe this standard will further national strategic goals for improved bibliographic control and access. Colleagues from NLM and NAL are most concerned that a systematic review of RDA has not yet been possible and, given the potential magnitude and broad impact of the changes, such a review is essential. While draft chapters of RDA have been available, a clear, concise, and cohesive understanding of the overall impact of the entire standard is needed. Until the completion of the rules and the availability of the RDA online tool, reviewers will not be able fully to assess their impact on: --Description, access, and navigation practices for a broad array of users and types of materials --Current and future electronic carriers and information management systems to support RDA goals --Estimated costs for implementation and maintenance during a time of flat, even reduced, budgets The three national libraries agreed on the following approach: First, we jointly commit to further development and completion of RDA. Second, following its completion, a decision to implement the rules will be based upon the positive evaluation of RDA's utility within the library and information environment, and criteria reflecting the technical, operational, and financial implications of the new code. This
Re: [RDA-L] Most recent JSC outcomes
Hello everyone,
I think that what Mac Elrod is quoting from is a handout that was
distributed at a meeting of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging's
Bibco and CONSER Operations Committees. The official outcomes are
currently being drafted and reviewed and it is expected that they
will be issued around May 12. I will of course send a message to
RDA-L when they are available.
Regards,
Nathalie
Nathalie Schulz
Secretary, JSC
At 00:14 02/05/2008, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
In the most recent JSC outcomes (soon to be on their website) it is
comforting to see that statement of responsibility has been added to
the core elements, and that manufacturer has been added to elements.
No mention is made of place of publication joining core elements.
By ISBD requirements will be fully covered in Appendix D I assume
ISBD punctuation requirements is meant. ISBD requirements for
selection and order of elements should be covered in the body of RDA,
determining core elements.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Authority Files on the Web
Just a quick response on the 'authority files on the Web' part of this query, the Virtual International Authority File is a reality, even if it is still in start up project mode - try http://viaf.org (for now it is just the personal name authority records from the Library of Congress, the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, and the Bibliotheque nationale de France). This was started long before the WGFBC was ever thought of. Another authority file on the Web is a portion of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is also available in SKOS format at http://lcsh.info/. There are also the Web tools for subscription that also give access to LCC, LCSH, etc. (like Class Web). - Barbara Tillett Karen Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/2/2008 12:47 PM This is interesting news, but I'm hoping the larger timeline for RDA doesn't overshadow some other efforts. 1. I didn't see a mention of the RDA-Dublin Core initiative. 2. No mention of FRBR, testing or otherwise. (It may be implicit, but still...) 3. One of the most intriguing recommendations in the original draft WoGroFuBiCo report was the idea of putting authorities on the Web -- an idea so tantalizing, in terms of surfacing the excellent work librarians do from under our collective bushel, that I have contemplated making a teeshirt that says, Free the Authorities. So... how goes it with these ideas? For example, with #3, is there any chance this will happen, and does it need to wait until RDA has been baked, cooled, and frosted? K.G. Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RDA-L] Authority Files on the Web
VIAF, very cool. Will have to get in touch with my NACO liaison about its relation to NACO work. I just submitted a name for review for Agapius, Bishop of Hierapolis. DNB has it entered under the Arabic form of the name. What does that mean for NACO? Gene Fieg Cataloger Claremont School of Theology [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RDA-L] Authority Files on the Web
VIAF -- definite coolness. I'd add the URL to my teeshirt. ;-) I realize ClassWeb is an essential revenue stream, but it would be nice to see those funded to be open for all. (Suppressing political comment about national priorities) K.G. Schneider -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access on behalf of Barbara B Tillett Sent: Fri 5/2/2008 1:13 PM To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Authority Files on the Web Just a quick response on the 'authority files on the Web' part of this query, the Virtual International Authority File is a reality, even if it is still in start up project mode - try http://viaf.org (for now it is just the personal name authority records from the Library of Congress, the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, and the Bibliotheque nationale de France). This was started long before the WGFBC was ever thought of. Another authority file on the Web is a portion of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is also available in SKOS format at http://lcsh.info/. There are also the Web tools for subscription that also give access to LCC, LCSH, etc. (like Class Web). - Barbara Tillett Karen Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/2/2008 12:47 PM This is interesting news, but I'm hoping the larger timeline for RDA doesn't overshadow some other efforts. 1. I didn't see a mention of the RDA-Dublin Core initiative. 2. No mention of FRBR, testing or otherwise. (It may be implicit, but still...) 3. One of the most intriguing recommendations in the original draft WoGroFuBiCo report was the idea of putting authorities on the Web -- an idea so tantalizing, in terms of surfacing the excellent work librarians do from under our collective bushel, that I have contemplated making a teeshirt that says, Free the Authorities. So... how goes it with these ideas? For example, with #3, is there any chance this will happen, and does it need to wait until RDA has been baked, cooled, and frosted? K.G. Schneider [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RDA-L] Authority Files on the Web
DNB and others to eventually join VIAF will not necessarily follow the same cataloging rules or conventions or even the same scripts or language (we hope soon to add more non-Latin scripts) - records for the same entitity are mapped to each other using a computer algorithm that is about 95% accurate - so a few things will be missing or mis-matched. VIAF could be used by NACO as a resource - not as the model for the authorized heading. Please also be forewarned, VIAF is still in test mode. - Barbara Gene Fieg [EMAIL PROTECTED] 5/2/2008 1:28 PM VIAF, very cool. Will have to get in touch with my NACO liaison about its relation to NACO work. I just submitted a name for review for Agapius, Bishop of Hierapolis. DNB has it entered under the Arabic form of the name. What does that mean for NACO? Gene Fieg Cataloger Claremont School of Theology [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Vocabularies Project
Properties table
http://docs.google.com/View?revision=_latestdocid=dhpg2gtj_54fgnz8rfshl=en
Someone did not take Philosophy 101. Almost every definition uses the
term(s) being defined. The few instances in which examples are given
are helpful; that should be done in each case.
Of course the inclusion of the MARC field tag (rarely done) would make
it much clearer. The inclusion of History of the work as a property
might bring back 503?
Statement of responsibility and series are lacking, as are class
numbers, subject headings, and all entries except title and standard
numbers.
Statement of responsibility and series are properties it seems to me,
even if the others are assigned. But do the others become properties
if included in the item's CIP?
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
