Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
If I want an English translation of a work, why would I want to
know about the original and other translations?
I think the operative word here is I. What if
someone else wants to know, either a researcher or a library staff member
doing collection development?
The catalog serves many purposes
for many types of users on many levels, which makes it hard to fit into a
retail model of I want it, here it is. The catalog is part of
the research process in addition to being a delivery mechanism.
Cindy Wolff
James
said:
The structure of the card catalog allowed
people to do the FRBR user
tasks (where--for those who
understood--people really and truly could
find/identify/select/obtain
works/expressions/manifestation/items by
their
authors/titles/subjects (or at least they could if the catalogers
had done their jobs correctly).
I am second
to none in deploring the loss of some features of the card
catalogue. But in addition to cataloguers doing their job, those
cards had to be filed. At the end of the card catalogue era, this
was
becoming increasingly difficult in larger academic
institutions. Some
student filers were dumping cards rather
that filing them. Escaping
card filing was a major improvement
provided by OPACs, right up there
with keyword searching. In
Canada, micro or print catalgues produced
by Utlas ending filing
for many libraries prior to OPACs.
I agree with your
basic position on FRBR. If I want an English
translation of a
work, why would I want to know about the original and
other
translations? Certainly I am not interested in knowing about
resources not in the collection, when looking for immediate access.
Few libraries for which we catalogue would have the array of
related
expressions and manifestations to display.
Since in Bibframe translations are different works rather than
different expressions of one work, FRBR does not seem to be central
to
Bibframe's structure, although there will be links relating
these
works. Unfortunately, FRBR and WEMI organization of RDA
do make RDA
difficult to comprehend. Theory trumped
pragmatism.
__ __ J. McRee
(Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries
Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__
\__
Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change
Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change in communication formats, but not in rules. This is what I have been thinking about for a while as I read these discussions: What if we gave a standard and nobody came, but some other powerful, oblivious standard came for us? Cindy
Re: [RDA-L] Location or venue needed as RDA relationship designator
That's a good point Daniel. Or, host creates a vision of an alien popping
out of the gallery.
Cindy Wolff
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Starr, Daniel
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2013 1:38 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Location or venue needed as RDA relationship
designator
Almost anything would be better than host institution, which makes it seem
as if we've just put out a bowl of crackers and opened a few bottles of
wine.
Daniel
Daniel Starr
Associate Chief Librarian
Thomas J. Watson Library
The Metropolitan Museum of Art
1000 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10028
212-650-2582
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Chris Swadling
Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 9:34 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Location or venue needed as RDA relationship
designator
ALS Library Services have been using host institution for galleries where
exhibitions have been held, as we thought that this was the best fit
Chris.
SLC feels the need for location or venue as a relationship
designator, to use for venues such as galleries where an exhibition is
held, theatres and concert halls where performances are held.
Currently we are using host institution, but I suspect most don't
this of galleries, theatres, and concert halls as institutions.
Since venues may not have published the item issuing body can not
always be used.
What relationship designator are others using for venues?
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__
\__
--
Chris Swadling
Cataloguing Team Leader
ALS Library Services Pty Ltd
12-14 Tooronga Avenue
Edwardstown SA 5039
Australia
Tel: +61 8 8276 5500 Fax: +61 8 8276 5511
chris.swadl...@alslib.com.auhttp://www.alslib.com.au
Re: [RDA-L] The A in RDA
I liked this comment: The fact is, it is important to keep in mind that the Googles are *not* really finding/discovery tools similar to library catalogs and I think it is a mistake to look at them that way: the Googles are advertising agencies and probably the greatest advertising agencies that have ever existed. Why are they the greatest? Because they have more information about the public than any other advertising agency has ever had before. And they use that information to their own advantages, in all sorts of different ways. I am also concerned about this. For so many years now we kept reading articles about how tech savvy our users are, but with the contradiction that users don't really want to search, they just want to find. This mentality has turned many of our users into lazy researchers while flattering them as tech-savvy consumers. This savvy consumer concept falls apart when every so often, search engines and tech magazines feel the need to outline special search tips and tricks, like the ones we kept trying to teach catalog users who were convinced they didn't need to learn such methods. These aren't secret tips, they are skills that everyone should have. While our users don't have to learn everything about MARC, RDA and AACR2, it would help them to get a better understanding of how the bibliographic data is parceled out, which includes wording of certain fields and controlled vocabularies. I think that our users are smart enough to learn how to really search the catalog, we just gave up on giving them a chance because of the push to think of their searching as consuming and our doing all the work and thinking for them as a service. I don't have to speak in tech services language to them, but it is the language of my profession and I won't apologize for it when I use among my peers. Every profession has their own language and we don't have to make it all understandable to everyone outside the profession. We are also catalog users and we need information others may not want. I am interested in learning how RDA and Bibframe will develop and how they will translate into the development of new discovery tools. I think we have a new opportunity to provide robust information to our users and our users have a right to be better informed and taught as opposed to being sold something. Cindy Wolff
Re: [RDA-L] 336, 337, 338 and the post-MARC environment
I think useful/useless in the eye of the beholder. While it is very important to have data that is understandable by non-catalogers, it is also important to acknowledge that catalogers are also users. The data catalogers need for reporting and analysis doesn't have to be made visible to all, but it should be considered a valid data point to whoever may need it. Cindy Wolff From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 5:06 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] 336, 337, 338 and the post-MARC environment On 09/05/2013 22:17, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: snip On 5/9/2013 3:56 PM, Gene Fieg wrote: And how are these field going to be displayed in an easily understandable manner to the patron. Will we need a priest of RDA near the shoulder of every patron as she/he searches for that DVD she knows is in the library somewhere, because the AACR2 catalog told her so? Does this question apply to MARC leader, 006, 007, and 008 too? Surely our catalogs were completely useless for the past 40 years, because they contained all this data which is not directly intelligible? Or no, it's because of those priests of MARC you were talking about that we all had, right? Oh, it's not that the catalogs were useless, but that all those fixed fields were entirely useless, just fortunately including data nobody cared about anyway -- but for some reason we've spent literally millions of person hours continuing to enter that useless data for 40 years anyway? Come on. Data that is not meant to be directly intelligible by end-users is nothing new to us. /snip So, does it now make sense to *increase* the amount of information that nobody uses, or can use? Of course, what does make sense is that sooner or later, somebody, somewhere, sometime, will determine what is useful and what is not. Whenever someone is looking at work being done, they understand that many times it is easier to just continue letting people do exactly what they have always done than to try to (gasp!) *change* it which will always create a huge backlash! How long did it take before the fixed field information Main entry in the body of the entry was finally eliminated because people finally recognized it was useless to everybody? It wasn't hard to do--it only took a fraction of a second, but nobody needed it. How much of the fixed field information has never been used at all? Probably quite a bit. I won't enter the danger zone of the variable fields! Roy Tennant has been making the first forays in that direction. When cataloging was a walled-off, semi-cloistered occupation, we could get by with it but those days are gone. They are as dead as those beautiful medieval cloisters that I love to visit. It is another world today. -- James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/ First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
Re: [RDA-L] RDA CIP
Isn't CIP data transfer supposed to be part of the automation in this process, especially from a bibframe perspective? Cindy Wolff Honestly, I never have thought about that CIP is a reliable source. But maybe I am wrong. Since Ian mentioned translation, I have a Chinese translation joke. I have done several Chinese books for the Lincoln Presidential Library. These books all are thread-bound. One of matched OCLC records showed that the translator's death was earlier than the author's birth year. Apparently it it not possible for a translator to translate a book that has not been written. Eventually I found out the right author by searching the Internet. This is actually a big lesson for me. Since then I reject to do stuff that I am not comfortable with :) Have fun :) Joan Wang Illinois Heartland Library System On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Ian Fairclough ifairclough43...@yahoo.comwrote: RDA-L readers, Sometimes CIP for a previous edition is printed. In such cases you can take pertinent data, such as the LCCN (which is invalid, and should be coded so using subfield z, but is nevertheless usable as a search key) and include it in the record for the book in hand. Once I had a Spanish translation of an English-language book for which the Library of Congress had prepared CIP. The translator translated the entire book - CIP and all! For a while I wondered if LC had done it. - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com -- Zhonghong (Joan) Wang, Ph.D. Cataloger -- CMC Illinois Heartland Library System (Edwardsville Office) 6725 Goshen Road Edwardsville, IL 62025 618.656.3216x409 618.656.9401Fax
Re: [RDA-L] Relators for contributors and consultants--Pre-existing poem
You mean like Beethoven using Schiller's Ode to Joy? Cindy Bernadette asked: And if a composer sets a pre-existing poem to music, what relator term should the poet get? None of the creator list terms are available, and 'writer of added lyrics' presumes that the music predates the text. No one has replied to this yet, so I'll try to tackle it. This is a 'Related Work' situation. I could not find a specific Related Work \ Derivative Work \ Relationship Designator at J.2.2 http://access.rdatoolkit.org/J.2.2.html , so I would use either the most general based on (work) or one step down adaptation of (work); unless musical setting of (work) could apply? In RDA minus MARC: Related Work: AAP (or link to record) for the Poem Relationship Designator: musical setting of (work) In RDA/MARC: add a Related Work added entry for the poem: 700 1# $i musical setting of (work): $a Poet, John. $t Poem. Yes/No? Deborah - - - - - - - - Deborah Fritz TMQ, Inc. mailto:debo...@marcofquality.com debo...@marcofquality.com http://www.marcofquality.com www.marcofquality.com From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Bernadette Mary O'Reilly Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:59 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Relators for contributors and consultants Hello, I want to provide a 'model' record for training purposes for a resource which is a dictionary of biography. It has a consultant editor, 3 editors and 15 contributors. The latter presumably did most of the writing and are between them responsible for most of the intellectual/artistic content of the resource, but because they are responsible for different bits the work is a compilation, entered under title. 'editor of compilation' seems right for the 3 editors. I suppose that the consultant editor will have to be just 'editor', but that doesn't seem good for someone who presumably is offering guidance before and during the writing rather than tidying it afterwards. And what about the contributors? Is it legitimate to use 'author' for contributors to a work entered under a title? They are authors of their own bits, but not creators with respect to the work as a whole, and 'author' is in the creator list. (I only plan to name one contributor - the rest will be '[and fourteen others].') A similar case: a compilation of photographs by many different people, each, naturally, responsible for separate photos. Could they be 'photographer'? 'illustrator' is not good, since the text is slight and subordinate to the photos. And if a composer sets a pre-existing poem to music, what relator term should the poet get? None of the creator list terms are available, and 'writer of added lyrics' presumes that the music predates the text. Suggestions or clarifications would be very welcome. Thanks, Bernadette *** Bernadette O'Reilly Catalogue Support Librarian 01865 2-77134 Bodleian Libraries, Osney One Building Osney Mead Oxford OX2 0EW. ***
