Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

and convey the information to the users of your records. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 11/9/2011 12:09 PM, Billie Hackney wrote: I apologize for being testy. It's just that anything that catalogers themselves say about

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

this in MARC.] John Attig ALA Representative to the JSC jx...@psu.edu On 11/9/2011 1:49 PM, Christopher Winters wrote: I've presided over the creation of more than 2400 RDA records for sheet maps over the last 13 months at the University of Chicago Library. Relationship

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

On 11/9/2011 3:59 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting John Attig jx...@psu.edu: Second, there are some relationships that are part of the RDA element structure that do not have designators. Publisher is one of these. This is an element in RDA and (therefore?) does not have a designator

[RDA-L] Agenda for the JSC meeting in Glasgow

/jxa16/blogs/resource_description_and_access_ala_rep_notes/ You can subscribe to an RSS feed if you wish. John Attig ALA Representative to the JSC jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Subject headings at what level?

to cover this and other relationships, which I hope the FRBR Review Group will undertake soon. As several people have pointed out, these relationships exist and are important, and the model will be deficient so long as they are not covered. John Attig Authority Control Librarian

Re: [RDA-L] RDA media terms

/rdamedia.html The list for Carrier Type is at http://www.loc.gov/standards/valuelist/rdacarrier.html As usual, we owe all this to the wonderful folks at the Network Development and MARC Standards Office at LC. John On 9/12/2011 4:25 PM, John Attig wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Karen

Re: [RDA-L] Browse and search BNB open data

of sequencing a given result set. Catalogers tend to resist giving up their hand-crafted headings, but that tends to be because they are not offered attractive alternatives. What I suggested above seems to be such an attractive alternative. John Attig Authority Control Librarian

Re: [RDA-L] Developments in RDA between 2008 and 2010

That information will be found on the JSC website http://www.rda-jsc.org/ I would start with the outcomes of the JSC meetings: http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs.html#outcomes and the minutes of the meetings: http://www.rda-jsc.org/working2.html#min John Attig ALA Representative

Re: [RDA-L] Proposed new 34X fields

vocabularies should be proposed through the appropriate JSC constituency. John Attig ALA Representative to the JSC Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 6/7/2011 10:45 PM, Amanda Xu wrote: I checked the proposal Proposal No. 2011-08: treatment of Controlled Lists of Terms

Re: [RDA-L] Apocrypha - make a proposal!

, but that is not always possible. John Attig ALA Representative to the Joint Steering Committee jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Dr. Snoopy

. This is definitely (in my opinion) a gray area in RDA, and one worth further discussion. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Linked files

resort. I thank Stephen for identifying the rules that would need to be changed in order to implement this proposal. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 4/25/2011 3:57 PM, Mary Mastraccio wrote: My guess is there are other

Re: [RDA-L] Where to Direct Questions about RDA Examples?

made. John Attig ALA Representative to the JSC jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Subjective Judgements in RDA 300s????

be achieved. We hope to see a proposal on the MARBI agenda at ALA Annual this year. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 3/2/2011 10:58 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting Jonathan Rochkind rochk...@jhu.edu: Which is why

Re: [RDA-L] Dates in rda records

be optional. Bob Maxwell just posted a reply that give more information about the core element requirements here. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 2/24/2011 5:28 PM, Gene Fieg wrote: After reading chapter 2 (again

Re: [RDA-L] Linked data

. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 2/3/2011 12:41 PM, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting Kevin M. Randall k...@northwestern.edu: Fields 760-787 have strictly speaking never been dual function fields, because they are not defined

Re: [RDA-L] Linked data

as alternatives. Beyond that -- as Tom Delsey documented in his analysis of MARC -- there are a variety of administrative tasks, entities, and elements that MARC has to support that fall completely outside the scope of RDA. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn

Re: [RDA-L] Form

is the author.) Unless the form of the publisher's name on the item is an important identifying feature -- which it is occasionally. Again, different tools for different tasks. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Form

of RDA. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Roles/relationships (was Form)

for publishers are the exception rather than the rule in current practice. Should we change that practice? Karen's example of what can be done if we can provide properly-constructed and controlled metadata presents a strong argument that we should. John Attig Authority Control Librarian

Re: [RDA-L] Form

On 12/14/2010 10:04 AM, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting John Attig jx...@psu.edu: There are many things that can act in more than one way in a FRBR model. One of these is Place, which is a group 3 entity, but is also an attribute of several other entities: Place of publication, Place associated

Re: [RDA-L] Form

On 12/13/2010 2:20 PM, Casey A Mullin wrote: Thomas raises a salient point here. The notion of Form/genre is not addressed well in FRBR, FRSAD or RDA. In RDA, Form of work currently only maps to places in MARC where it would be used in an access point, or in the corresponding 380 field; this,

Re: [RDA-L] Form

. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Confusion between Field of activity and Profession or occupation

to make and the results not helpful. The JSC noted that the distinction is made in FRAD and preferred to err with the model we purport to be following [principled-based!], while proposing to the FRBR Review Group that the two elements be merged. John Attig Authority Control

Re: [RDA-L] More granulalrity if imprint year coding?

processing... might as well not be recorded. I believe that there are plans to do this -- and not just with regard to the 260 field. On the other hand, at some point, we have to recognize that encoding RDA data in MARC 21 is both self-defeating and masochistic! John Attig Authority

Re: [RDA-L] Parallel Title Proper RDA 2.3.3

at some level. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu On 10/11/2010 11:44 AM, Arakawa, Steven wrote: Is there no cataloger option to limit the number of parallel titles proper to transcribe? Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian

Re: [RDA-L] FRAD user tasks in RDA

and principles for RDA, Tom Delsey noted this discrepancy and proposed to use clarify and understand in the RDA documentation. The JSC has suggested that the FRBR Review Group look at this when they undertake to reconcile FRBR and FRAD ... which we hope they will do shortly. John Attig ALA Representative

Re: [RDA-L] RDA websites

with the release of the RDA Toolkit. Additional examples will be included, as they are approved by the JSC. John Attig ALA Rep to the JSC At 05:21 PM 5/3/2010, Dr. Robert Ellett wrote: One of the issues that concerns me is the disappearance of Appendix M (the examples) from the RDA

Re: [RDA-L] RDA websites

. On the other hand, as noted above, the JSC will continue to post proposals, whether this is done on the JSC website or as part of the RDA Toolkit itself. We are committed to making the maintenance of RDA a public process. John Attig ALA Rep to the JSC

Re: [RDA-L] Signatory to a treaty

in the case of works and expressions. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Signatory to a treaty

At 02:46 PM 4/14/2010, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting John Attig jx...@psu.edu: Signatory to a treaty, etc. is therefore one of several identifying elements necessary to distinguish between different treaties (works). This is independent of the role of the signatories as creators of the work. Note

Re: [RDA-L] Signatory to a treaty

At 05:07 PM 4/14/2010, Karen Coyle wrote: Quoting John Attig jx...@psu.edu: I would also note another example of the entity vs. attribute problem. There are a large number of elements (attributes of many different entities) for places of various sorts; there is also a Place entity. Yes, I

Re: [RDA-L] Question about RDA relationships (App. J)

be an item belonging to the manifestation of the expression of the work embodied in that volume. It seems to me that FRBR lets you model the situation either way -- or both. John Attig Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Question about RDA relationships (App. J)

. John Attig Penn State University jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] Systems v Cataloging was: RDA and granularity

of the RDA and MARC element vocabularies. Do you have a functional definition of what makes an element vocabulary coherent? John Attig Penn State Univ. jx...@psu.edu

Re: [RDA-L] RDA and granularity

At 08:50 PM 1/28/2010, Karen Coyle wrote: 1) what was the functional design goal that determined what guidance bits were designed as elements? In other words, what was the purpose in defining the elements? Understanding that could help answer questions that come up during implementation. There

Re: [RDA-L] RDA and granularity

-- but the guidance tries not to assume what encoding format you will choose. It seems to me that the MARC decision to support subfields $n and $p as data elements was appropriate in terms of the instructions in AACR2, and continues to be valid for RDA. John Attig Penn State Univ

Re: [RDA-L] Urls in access fields

At 12:46 AM 7/15/2009, Karen Coyle wrote: I also think that we need to move away from the idea that there is one preferred access point for anyone or any thing. Instead, we should consider that in any particular context there is a preferred access point, but that may vary by circumstance. The

Re: [RDA-L] Outcomes of JSC March meeting

(the discussion only took about four hours); the list of issues that were NOT resolved, however, is even larger and remains for future work. John Attig ALA Rep to the JSC

Re: [RDA-L] The Person entity [was: Comments from Martha M. Yee ... 1 of 2]

At 12:02 PM 6/4/2008, Karen Coyle wrote: And your definition of person will determine what these relevant data elements are, and what you can do with this data. If you your persons are bibliographic entities then they can't interact with data about real persons (LDAP databases, the copyright

Re: [RDA-L] Comments from Martha M. Yee on the April 10, 2008 version of the STATEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CATALOGUING PRINCIPLES 1 of 2

there is an appendix (at least in the draft) that shows how different entities and attributes can be combined into an authority record. It seems to me that record structure is one of the constructs that one uses the model to help define. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State

Re: [RDA-L] Comments from Martha M. Yee on the April 10, 2008 version of the STATEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CATALOGUING PRINCIPLES 1 of 2

At 01:41 PM 6/3/2008, Karen Coyle wrote: John Attig wrote: I have argued elsewhere that there is an important distinction between an entity record for a person, family, or corporate body -- which represents the person, etc. -- and an authority record for the NAME of the person, etc. Actually

Re: [RDA-L] JSC Meeting Outcomes April 2008

this data. Apparently this has not yet been done. John Attig Authority Control Librarian Penn State University John Attig wrote: At 09:27 AM 5/9/2008, Karen Coyle wrote: Adam L. Schiff wrote: At present, the instruction in RDA is to take and record what you see

Re: FW: [RDA-L] FW: [RDA-L] New works and new expressions (was Cataloger scenarios added to wiki)

I think that FRBR and RDA are trying to get away from the concept of authorship, which covers a variety of roles. I was trying to be more specific in indicating what roles I thought were involved in the process of realizing a work in an expression. So I guess the answer to your question depends

Re: Cataloger Scenarios added to wiki

that has emerged from this discussion is, in my opinion, not a mainstream interpretation of FRBR and should be used with extreme caution as the basis for your work. John Attig At 03:11 PM 3/11/2008, McGrath, Kelley C. wrote: Greta wrote... Scenario 3. And I hate to be a broken record

Re: FW: [RDA-L] Cataloger Scenarios added to wiki

, but imagined that it was something particularly abstruse and mysterious--John Stuart Mill. -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of John Attig Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 8:00 AM To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC

Re: New works and new expressions (was Cataloger scenarios added to wiki)

I would add that the case of motion pictures is difficult, again because of the many different contributions involved. I can't imagine a case where the ONLY change would be a change of actors. All the contributions and contributors to a remake are different, which is why it seems appropriate to

Re: FW: [RDA-L] New works and new expressions (was Cataloger scenarios added to wiki)

But that doesn't mean that you can't distinguish the contributions of those collaborators to the creation of the work from their contributions to the realization of an expression. Let's take a VERY simple example. Shakespeare created a work called As you like it (I won't use Hamlet, because it

Outcomes of the October 2007 Joint Steering Committee meeting

and the Committee of Principals. Further information on the organization has also been posted on the JSC Web site. New sections of RDA will be issued for review in December 2007. John Attig for the Joint Steering Committee

Re: Application profiles and RDA

transitions to help navigate through this very complex image. The image in question begins with slide 17. John Attig Penn State University [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Alternate titles, an example of description broken into bits

reflected in the record-level language coding). John Attig [not writing as:] ALA Representative to the JSC

Re: Question regarding rule 1.6.1.2

ask myself whether this means I can't capitalize other words in the sentence. John Attig Cataloging Services Penn State University University Park, PA 16802 [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 11:19 AM 1/6/2006, John Radencich wrote: 1.6.1.2 - Capitalization of other