Phew, that's very confusing, I'm going to have to read it over a couple
times, but I think it does help, thanks for the info Diane.
Diane Hillmann wrote:
Jonathan:
I asked Gordon your question, and here's his reply:
/The RDA/ONIX framework itself
(http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/docs/5chair10.pdf) provides
information about how the RDA carrier terms have been derived (see
Appendix D in particular). The RDA carrier type vocabulary (as in the
metadata registry) is an example of what the RDA/ONIX framework refers
to as a <base carrier category> vocabulary, which uses only three of
the underlying attributes identified in the ontology
(StorageMediumFormat, HousingFormat, IntermediationTool). The
vocabulary does not incorporate any of the other framework ontology
attributes such as EncodingFormat. As the framework says, these other
attributes do not have a closed, controlled set of instances which is
generally applicable across a wide range of communities. In order to
gain the best interoperability potential from the framework, RDA has
chosen to create separate vocabularies incorporating some or all of
the non-base carrier categories, rather than, say, augmenting the base
carrier !
categories (the RDA carrier type vocabulary) - because these are
guaranteed to interoperate with base categories from non-RDA
communities. For example, RDA has a vocabulary for EncodingFormat (see
section 3.19.3.3 in Chapter 3 of the RDA final draft
(http://www.rdaonline.org/constituencyreview/Phase1Chp3_11_2_08.pdf);
examples of the terms are <DVD audio>, <DVD-R>, <DVD video>, <HD-DVD>,
etc.
In RDA, a full description/label for the carrier of a specific
resource is created from a combination of terms from several of these
vocabularies, by following the guidance given in Chapter 3. See the
examples given in Appendix M of the RDA draft
(http://www.rdaonline.org/constituencyreview/Phase1AppM_11_10_08.pdf).
Unfortunately, it looks as if the example for a DVD on page 26
might be a source of confusion. The Carrier type (videodisc) does not
appear in the vocabulary of Carrier types in Chapter 3 of RDA, but
this is probably an oversight because it is given as an example base
category in the RDA/ONIX framework. The Extent (2 DVD-videos)
presumably invokes RDA 3.4.1.5b (because videodisc is missing from the
carrier type vocabulary) or 3.4.15c (<DVD-video> is the term preferred
by the agency creating the example record - and not to be confused
with the Encoding format <DVD video>). The Extent in this example
should probably be <2 videodiscs>.
Although some of the terms in this (flawed) example may appear to
be redundant, in fact only Media type (video) and Carrier type
(videodisc) have genuine redundancy for general metadata purposes
(Media type is derived from Carrier type). For example, a
videocassette (carrier type) can also be encoded as DVD audio
(encoding format), while a videodisc can be encoded as HD-DVD, etc.
<Stuff> is complicated in the real world. A further source of
difficulty is the general conflation of carrier and content types in
single vocabulary terms, which is prevalent in most of the cataloguing
guidelines in use around the world by libraries. Many of these
guidelines have faced severe difficulty in recent years in clarifying
the difference between content and carrier, especially with
developments in digital technologies. The RDA/ONIX framework was
developed to assist metadata creators to make that clarification (to
improve interoperability between different metadata communities) and
avoid the problems in previous cataloguing rules.
For example, Jonathan asks for controlled vocabularies for
<multimedia> materials, but does he mean mixed content types (still
images, audio and text on a single carrier such as a <DVD>) or mixed
carrier types (DVD, CD and workbook in a <multimedia kit>), or both?
Whatever, RDA provides a way of creating unambiguous metadata in the
fairly ambiguous environment of human metadata creators and consumers.
Cheers
Gordon
Gordon Dunsire
Depute Director, Centre for Digital Library Research, University of
Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland/
I hope this helps.
Diane
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Thanks Diane. That article on RDA/ONIX doesn't seem to include actual
terms, the actual vocabularly. I realize there are plans to
'register' it officially, but prior to that, can the actual term list
be found anywhere in human-readable format? Or does it not exist yet?
Jonathan
Diane I. Hillmann wrote:
Hi, Jonathan,
Two points as you search out a solution:
1. I agree with your assessment of the current RDA carrier
vocabulary. You might want to look at the RDA/ONIX vocabularies
(still not registered, but there are plans to do so:
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january07/dunsire/01dunsire.html).
2. These vocabularies are a start, not a finish: once RDA and the
vocabularies are "published" there's an intention to begin improving
them. The first step was to get the out of the text, the second to
build on the NSDL Registry's vocabulary development tools (some
there, some not yet) to build them up in ways that will be much more
useful.
Diane
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Anyone know of any good existing controlled vocabulary for 'format'
or 'carrier' for multimedia materials? I'm thinking of things like
"CD", "DVD", "digital", etc.
The closest I can get is from RDA at
http://metadataregistry.org/concept/list/vocabulary_id/46.html
(thanks Karen and Diane), but it seems _really_ insufficient. As
far as I can tell "audio disc" is used for both a CD and a vinyl
disc, and there's nothing available there for "DVD" at all. Or
for "digital". Although I'm not sure what I mean by "digital", I
guess CD and DVD are both digital, but I was thinking of something
to identify a digital file on a computer network free of particular
carrier. I guess that wouldn't be in a carrier vocabulary at all,
after all, that would be sort of a null carrier. Phew, this stuff
does get complicated quick. Which I guess is why nobody's worked
out a good one yet.
Too bad RDA's is so _far_ from good though. Any others anyone knows
about?
Jonathan
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
Anyone know of any good existing controlled vocabulary for 'format'
or 'carrier' for multimedia materials? I'm thinking of things like
"CD", "DVD", "digital", etc.
The closest I can get is from RDA at
http://metadataregistry.org/concept/list/vocabulary_id/46.html
(thanks Karen and Diane), but it seems _really_ insufficient. As
far as I can tell "audio disc" is used for both a CD and a vinyl
disc, and there's nothing available there for "DVD" at all. Or
for "digital". Although I'm not sure what I mean by "digital", I
guess CD and DVD are both digital, but I was thinking of something
to identify a digital file on a computer network free of particular
carrier. I guess that wouldn't be in a carrier vocabulary at all,
after all, that would be sort of a null carrier. Phew, this stuff
does get complicated quick. Which I guess is why nobody's worked
out a good one yet.
Too bad RDA's is so _far_ from good though. Any others anyone knows
about?
Jonathan
--
Jonathan Rochkind
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
410.516.8886
rochkind (at) jhu.edu
