Wojciech Siemaszkiewicz wrote: > Kevin tried to be sarcastic in my opinion. However, he forgot that RDA is > basically AACR2 in a new uniform with "sophisticated" jargon that even > LC instructors have problem with (just came back from the RDA training > module 1 part 2). Let's not kid ourselves. RDA people just took AACR2 > apart added several new fields and reinvented English language so it > sounds "cool." It is also, in their opinion, a way forward away from strict > rules of AACR2. However, the reality of cataloging and its purpose on top > of financial abilities of many libraries is just that obnoxious cloud > hanging over implementation of RDA.
If you want to see AACR2 in a new uniform, I suggest taking a look at the first draft of AACR3. Now *that* really does look like just a slightly spiffed-up AACR2. But after the initial, negative response to AACR3, the JSC and the editor went back to the drawing board, and came up with a *drastically* revised concept. Yes, in RDA many of the specifics in the instructions, and the results of the cataloger's work, look pretty much the same as in AACR2. But remember that one major goal was to be able to use RDA to produce metadata that could work together with our legacy data. But the emphasis on the FRBR entities, and the references to distinct named elements, bears no resemblance whatsoever to AACR2. This is something that I addressed in an article titled "RDA: End of the World Postponed?" in The Serials Librarian, v. 61, issue 3/4 (2011). http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/wser20/61/3-4 Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Northwestern University Library k...@northwestern.edu (847) 491-2939 Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!
