John, Thanks for pointing to that RDA/ONIX Framework. I wasn't aware of it. This does put a lot of the content, carrier, media type terms in context.
-- Sean Chen <sc...@law.duke.edu> Digital Resources Librarian J. Michael Goodson Law Library Duke University School of Law (919)613-7028 On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:24 AM, JOHN C ATTIG <jx...@psu.edu> wrote: > First, Kelley's original question was about what the correct Media Type > should be for streaming video according to the instructions in RDA. > > In RDA, there is a relationship between Media Type and Carrier Type. The > list of Carrier Types in 3.3.1.3 is divided into groups with captions that > refer implicitly to the Media Type terms. This is based on the RDA/ONIX > Framework for Resource Categorization; the attribute that defines Media Type > is one of the attributes that defines Carrier Type. For any given Carrier > Type there is one and only one appropriate Media Type. Therefore, if the > Carrier Type for streaming video is "online resource," then the Media Type is > "computer" because "online resource" is listed as a "Computer carrier". > [Note: One of the reasons why Media Type is not a core element in RDA is that > the Media Type can always be deduced from the Carrier Type, and therefore > there may be no need to record it explicitly.] > > The RDA Media Type is a general term identifying a category of storage media, > based on the type of intermediation tool required; it has nothing to do with > the type of files stored on the carrier or with the type of content stored in > those files. As John says, most users will make an inevitable leap from the > media term to a related content term, and this is one of the challenges in > using Media Type. However, RDA is clear that Media Type has nothing to do > with content. > > This said, I agree with Kelley that the distinction between audio, video, and > computer intermediation tools is becoming increasingly unclear. All three > are based on some sort of microprocessor, and the specific carriers (e.g., > discs) are likely to work in more than one type of machine. This is a > challenge for the RDA/ONIX Framework, and something that will need to be > addressed by future development of the Framework. > > For background, see the "RDA/ONIX Framework for Resource Categorization" > [5JSC/Chair/10]: > http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/5chair10.pdf > Any discussion of changes to the RDA Content Type, Media Type, or Carrier > Type terms needs to begin with a consideration of the Framework. > > John Attig > ALA Representative to the Joint Steering Committee > jx...@psu.edu > > From: "Kelley McGrath" <kell...@uoregon.edu> > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 7:06:40 PM > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Media type for streaming video > > OLAC is in the process of updating its streaming media best practices to be > RDA-compatible so it's coming soon. > > I do think there is something fundamentally wrong with the computer media > type and have thought so since the days when we were commenting on the RDA > drafts. There is nothing intrinsically different between a DVD-ROM with an > ebook or software on it and a DVD video in terms of the physical carrier. Is > there a difference between streaming MP3 files and those on a CD? Are the MP3 > files on a CD like the streaming ones (probably computer) or like a regular > audio CD (audio)? Under AACR2, LC made the former decision and said MP3 CDs > were electronic resources. This was based on the fact that they didn't play > in standalone players initially, although over time they started to sell CD > players that would play MP3 CDs. The line that we have historically tried to > draw between what plays in a standalone player and what needs a "computer" > doesn't make much sense anymore. I have argued before for a digital/analog > divide. Others in OLAC share my concerns, although there is less consensus > about the solution. > > Kelley > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 2:01 PM, John Hostage <host...@law.harvard.edu> wrote: > > I was cataloging one of these the other day and faced the same conundrum. > > I turned to the OLAC best practices document > > (http://www.olacinc.org/drupal/?q=node/47) which is several years old and > > needs to be updated for RDA and the new fields, but is still useful. > > > > Following the definitions of the attributes in RDA, I came up with the same > > 33X fields as you did. The trouble is that for the average person, "video" > > is nearly synonymous with "two-dimensional moving image," i.e. it denotes a > > content type rather than a media type. For a media type, "digital" would > > probably be more enlightening than either "computer" or "electronic". > > While we're at it, why do we generally not take account of the sound > > aspects of a 2-dimensional moving image, which can be sounds, spoken word, > > and/or performed music? > > > > In a world where everything is stored digitally and used on a digital > > device, these categories are going to get very blurry. > > > > ------------------------------------------ > > John Hostage > > Authorities and Database Integrity Librarian Harvard > > Library--Information and Technical Services Langdell Hall 194 > > Cambridge, MA 02138 host...@law.harvard.edu > > +(1)(617) 495-3974 (voice) > > +(1)(617) 496-4409 (fax) > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and > >> Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kelley > >> McGrath > >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 11:38 > >> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > >> Subject: [RDA-L] Media type for streaming video > >> > >> I had always assumed that the 33x fields for streaming video should > >> look like this due to the online nature of the resource: > >> > >> 336 __ $a two-dimensional moving image $2 rdacontent > >> 337 __ $a computer $2 rdamedia > >> 338 __ $a online resource $2 rdacarrier > >> > >> However, I was recently reviewing something where the following was > >> used: > >> > >> 336 __ $a two-dimensional moving image $2 rdacontent > >> 337 __ $a computer $2 rdamedia > >> 337 __ $a video $2 rdamedia > >> 338 __ $a online resource $2 rdacarrier > >> > >> A little googling found institutions recommending that as well as > >> > >> 336 __ $a two-dimensional moving image $2 rdacontent > >> 337 __ $a video $2 rdamedia > >> 338 __ $a online resource $2 rdacarrier > >> > >> The relevant RDA definitions for media type: > >> > >> Video: Media used to store moving or still images, designed for use > >> with a playback device such as a videocassette player or DVD player. > >> Includes media used to store digitally encoded as well as analog > >> images > >> > >> Computer: Media used to store electronic files, designed for use with > >> a computer. Includes media that are accessed remotely through file > >> servers as well as direct-access media such as computer tapes and > >> discs. > >> > >> Leaving aside the problematic nature of the computer media type in > >> RDA and working with RDA as written, what should the media type(s) > >> for streaming video be? > >> > >> Also worrying to me is the fact that catalogers are interpreting and > >> applying the these elements in such disparate ways for the same type > >> of material. What does this lack of consistency mean for our ability > >> to map these elements to more human-friendly displays? I suppose the > >> more important elements for mapping to icons, etc. are the content > >> and carrier types, but I still find it a little unsettling. > >> > >
