Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC
Looking at examples in the testdata, you find (spaces added for clarity) 336 $a text $2 rdacontent 337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia 338 $a volume $2 rdacarrier which reveals that the item is a plain book. The same might, using the codes instead, also be recorded like this: 336 $b txt $2 rdacontent 337 $b n $2 rdamedia 338 $b nc $2 rdacarrier The codes suggest two things: 1. 337 is redundant (the letter is always the first letter of the 338 code) 2. The verbal terms are less useful for indexing. For if you use the codes, you can truncate nc to n, for example, to get all unmediated stuff, cx to c to get all computer usable stuff, and so on. This is not possible with the words. One step further: if you string it all together into txtnc, you get the idea what can be done with it. In addition, verbal terms are not international and, in the course of history, subject to change. We all know what that means for large databases. The use of verbal terms is, in other words, subadequate both in terms of sustainability and machine actionability. This means the method used in the test is a waste of time and space and produces inferior data. B.Eversberg
Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC
-Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg Sent: February 17, 2011 8:48 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC Looking at examples in the testdata, you find (spaces added for clarity) 336 $a text $2 rdacontent 337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia 338 $a volume $2 rdacarrier which reveals that the item is a plain book. The same might, using the codes instead, also be recorded like this: 336 $b txt $2 rdacontent 337 $b n $2 rdamedia 338 $b nc $2 rdacarrier The codes suggest two things: 1. 337 is redundant (the letter is always the first letter of the 338 code) 2. The verbal terms are less useful for indexing. For if you use the codes, you can truncate nc to n, for example, to get all unmediated stuff, cx to c to get all computer usable stuff, and so on. This is not possible with the words. One step further: if you string it all together into txtnc, you get the idea what can be done with it. The Media Type (337) is based on the attribute IntermediationTool in the RDA/ONIX Framework (http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2007/5chair10.pdf). IntermediationTool is actually an attribute of the Carrier. There are only two sets of attributes in the original Framework-- those for Content and those for Carrier. I've found one area in RDA where Media Type is an actionable attribute-- when a new description of a manifestation is required for serials, integrating resources, and multipart monographs (RDA 1.6). So for example, if a serial changes from an unmediated to a microform media type, a new description is required, but not if it changes from a microfiche to a microfilm roll carrier. I've thought that the labels for these categories of content type and carrier type would work primarily in drop-down menus. My ILS has drop-down menus for fixed fields, but not for variable fields (although I recently suggested to a rep from the company that a useful upgrade for the software would be to add drop down menus for controlled vocabulary RDA-based fields throughout the MARC record). Even better, I think, would be an entire overhaul of the inputting screen. Related values shouldn't be scattered all over the place. Inputting should bring together the human-readable form, the normalized or coded form, related notes, and preview displays of records and generated icons. Because RDA elements for relationships are based on FRBR entities, there is also an implication there for how inputting screens should be organized. Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
[RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
Please excuse this very basic question if it has already been answered. I have only recently joined the ListServ. It is my assumption that LC and OCLC will announce adoption of RDA soon after the end of the evaluation period. If my institution does not buy/adopt RDA immediately thereafter, will we still be able to do original cataloging? We do not do a great of it. Most of what we contribute is local genealogical material. We do occasionally have some more general items, but not often. If we have an item which needs original cataloging after implementation takes place, will we be obligated to use RDA rules? Kathleen F. Lamantia, MLIS Technical Services Librarian Stark County District Library 715 Market Avenue North Canton, OH 44702 330-458-2723 klaman...@starklibrary.org Inspiring Ideas ∙ Enriching Lives ∙ Creating Community The Stark County District Library is a winner of the National Medal for library service, is one of the best 100 libraries in the U.S. according to the HAPLR rating, and is a Library Journal 5 Star library.
Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC
Thomas Brenndorfer said: Even better, I think, would be an entire overhaul of the inputting screen. Well, that's something that I have been asking for DECADES. Maybe at least the new stuff in RDA will push the ILS developers a little more... Kevin M. Randall Principal Serials Cataloger Bibliographic Services Dept. Northwestern University Library 1970 Campus Drive Evanston, IL 60208-2300 email: k...@northwestern.edu phone: (847) 491-2939 fax: (847) 491-4345
Re: [RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
Here is a more detailed list of AACR2/RDA differences.
-
Most changes are to choice of entry, or to description, not form of
entry.
-
The few changes to form of entry:
100/600/700 RDA change: More frequent use of |c identifier such as
occupation to create unique heading.
100/600/700|d LC RDA practice: Use hyphen before death date, hyphen after
birth date, but no b., d,; active replaces AACR2 fl. and RDA
florished. The use of active is no longer limited to pre 20th
century authors.
100/110/700/710 RDA change: addition of |e relators, e.g., |eauthor.
(This affects bibliographic records, not authorities.) This however
was not done during the test period.
110 RDA change: Spell our Dept. (This was in AACR2 but not
applied.) Remove |k uniform title for treaty entries.
111 RDA change: Give full name of conference as on item, e.g.,
Annual ...
130 RDA change: |pO.T. and |pN.T. removed from between Bible
and |p name of the individual books. For the whole Old and New
Testaments, spelled out. Qur'an replaces koran.
For 240 see Descriptive changes ...
7XX analytics
RDA adds |icontains (work), or |icontains (expression) before |a.
This may confuse patrons, and create split files; consider not
assigning and supression in display.
-
Changes in choice of entry:
100 RDA change: entry under first author, regardless of number. Cf.
245|c.
110 RDA change: Treaties are entered under the first country
mentioned, regardless of number or alphabetical order; or in the case
of a treaty between one country and a group of countries, under
the one country.
-
Descriptive changes are more numerous:
040|beng or |bfre; RDA change: 040|erda. (LAC already uses 040|b language
of cataloguing).
240 Uniform title after 1XX
RDA change: Under AACR2 (25.9) one uses Selections as collective
title for three or more various works by someone; under RDA one uses
Works. Selections. This comes into play with *two* or more works.
The order of the pieces for the uniform title Short stories. Spanish.
Selections is explicitly described in AACR2 (25.11). In RDA there
seems to be no similar explicit instruction. it might be Short
stories. Selections. Spanish. Under RDA, only one language is
allowed in the |l of a uniform title--no dual languages with
ampersand, no Polyglot for three or more languages.
2XX
RDA change: Use square brackets only for information not found in the
item, regardless of source within the item.
RDA change: [sic], or bracketed additional letters, no longer used
after typos. Create 246 with corrected title spellings.
RDA change: No longer add defining word to ambiguous title, e.g.,
:|b[poems], :|b[proceedings{.
RDA change: Transcribe punctuation as found, e.g., ..., but add ISBD
punctuation.
245 |b
RDA change: Other title information not a core element.
245|h [gmd]
RDA change: no longer used. SEE 336-338 below.
245|c RDA change: may transcribe all authors, regardless of number,
but may transcribe fewer followed by [and # others]. In the case of a
compilation with supplied title, transcribe statements of
responsibilities after titles in 505. Transcribe degrees, titles,
Jr., Rev., the late, etc.; but not Dame nor Sir.
*There is no required correlation between authors transcribed in 245,
500, 505, 508, or 511 and traced authors, i.e. one may have untraced
authors in the description, and unjustified author added entries.*
RDA change: A noun phrase *associated* with the author is included in
|c, e.g., 245 10 |aBurr /|ca novel by Gore Vidal, but 245 10 |aBurr
:|b a novel /|cGore Vidal.
250 RDA change: transcribe rather than abbreviate, e.g., 250 |aSecond
edition. Only use abbreviations if in the item. This result in the
unacceptable to some double period after an abbreviation, e.g., ed..
260 RDA change: Transcribe all places of publication in repeating |a;
transcribe full names of publishers. RDA moves needed jurisdiction
to 500, as opposed to bracketed in 260|a.
Bracket adjacent element in the same field, e.g., 260 |a[S.l.
:|b[s.n.],|c[2010?].
Fuller use of 250|e(|f|g) for manufacturing place, body, and date may
be seen in RDA records. This practice is not new.
RDA change: In the absence of a publication year, do not substitute
copyright year; instead of |cc2010, use |c[2010], c2010.* In the
absence of date of publication, and date of distribution or manufacturer is
known, use that date following |c, manufacturing date in |g. Name of
manufacturer need not be given if publisher is known, but not doing so
creates a strange display.
*RDA directs that the copyright sign be used, or copyright be spelled
out, rather than c.
Re: [RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
Kathleen Lamantia asked:
If my institution does not buy/adopt RDA immediately thereafter, will we st=
ill be able to do original cataloging?
In answer to a question concerning reprospective change to legacy
records, OCLC informed me that they will leave AACR2 records as they
are, and continue to accept AACR2 records, since they regularly have
new libraries join OCLC, which load their legacy records.
But purchasing the RDA Toolkit or print version is not required to do
RDA compatible records. I'm sending you SLC's RDA cheat sheet.
Our experience is that the cheat sheet is far easier to comprehend
than RDA.
Since the records you are preparing do not require the display of an
alternative to GMDs, and are not Bibles or treaties, the differences
are not great. Needing to spell our all abbreviations not found in
the item is the major change.
This is assuming you rarely have a geneology prepared by more than
three people, which with AACR2 would be entered under title. With
RDA, it would be entered under the first author mentioned, and all
authors may be listed in 256/$c and traced.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
Hello
What worries me is the existing OCLC policy
*If a record created according to either AACR2 or RDA already exists in
WorldCat, please do NOT create a duplicate record according to the other
code. Such duplicates are not within the scope of the OCLC policy on
parallel records and OCLC staff will merge them if found.
*When performing copy cataloging, catalogers may LOCALLY edit records
created under any rules to another set of rules.
So for those who don't have their IT departments on board to change to
RDA, the burden of stripping and redoing OCLC records from RDA to AACR2
in their local catalog is on the burden of each non-implementing
cataloging staff. The same will occur for those converting to RDA when
there is an AACR2 record.
Once this is done on a revised locally there is no way to share the
revised record. Every cataloging department all over the country will be
repeating the work which doesn't make sense.
I do not see that OCLC is supporting the needs of either the AACR2 or
RDA partner libraries under their current policy. Whichever format gets
the record in first will have the record in AACR2 or RDA. First come,
first served isn't the way a partnership shared database should work.
Ida Z. daRoza
San Mateo County Library
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 8:31 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
Kathleen Lamantia asked:
If my institution does not buy/adopt RDA immediately thereafter, will
we st=
ill be able to do original cataloging?
In answer to a question concerning reprospective change to legacy
records, OCLC informed me that they will leave AACR2 records as they
are, and continue to accept AACR2 records, since they regularly have
new libraries join OCLC, which load their legacy records.
But purchasing the RDA Toolkit or print version is not required to do
RDA compatible records. I'm sending you SLC's RDA cheat sheet.
Our experience is that the cheat sheet is far easier to comprehend
than RDA.
Since the records you are preparing do not require the display of an
alternative to GMDs, and are not Bibles or treaties, the differences
are not great. Needing to spell our all abbreviations not found in
the item is the major change.
This is assuming you rarely have a geneology prepared by more than
three people, which with AACR2 would be entered under title. With
RDA, it would be entered under the first author mentioned, and all
authors may be listed in 256/$c and traced.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC
RDA 337 is from 007/00, which is for category of material and RDA 338 is
from 007/01, which is for specific material designation. Catalogers have
the option to use code, instead of word to describe 337$b and 338$b.
We could make the terms for category of material more user-friendly, e.g.
using 337$b g to stand for motion picture, movie, etc. instead of projected
graphic.
We could also give each category of material a single tag with clean
definition, instead of using one tag for two categories, e.g. 337$b g for
both {007/00 g - projected graphic if no motion}, and {007/00 m - motion
picture if no sound or sound}.
I am concerned about legacy data migration and auto-generation of 337$b and
338$b from legacy data in MARC 007/00 and 007/01 fields, as what we are
doing now with work-level title generation out of associated manifestations
based on concatenated MARC field and sub-fields from e.g. 130, 222, 240,
245, 250, 260$c, etc. within the constraint of certain rules for work-level
title generation by material type.
Thanks!
Amanda
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Brenndorfer, Thomas
tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg
Sent: February 17, 2011 8:48 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA and MARC
Looking at examples in the testdata, you find (spaces added for
clarity)
336 $a text $2 rdacontent
337 $a unmediated $2 rdamedia
338 $a volume $2 rdacarrier
which reveals that the item is a plain book.
The same might, using the codes instead, also be recorded like this:
336 $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $b n $2 rdamedia
338 $b nc $2 rdacarrier
The codes suggest two things:
1. 337 is redundant (the letter is always the first letter of the 338
code)
2. The verbal terms are less useful for indexing. For if you use the
codes, you can truncate nc to n, for example, to get all unmediated
stuff, cx to c to get all computer usable stuff, and so on. This is
not possible with the words. One step further: if you string it all
together into txtnc, you get the idea what can be done with it.
The Media Type (337) is based on the attribute IntermediationTool in the
RDA/ONIX Framework (http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2007/5chair10.pdf).
IntermediationTool is actually an attribute of the Carrier. There are only
two sets of attributes in the original Framework-- those for Content and
those for Carrier.
I've found one area in RDA where Media Type is an actionable attribute--
when a new description of a manifestation is required for serials,
integrating resources, and multipart monographs (RDA 1.6).
So for example, if a serial changes from an unmediated to a microform media
type, a new description is required, but not if it changes from a microfiche
to a microfilm roll carrier.
I've thought that the labels for these categories of content type and
carrier type would work primarily in drop-down menus. My ILS has drop-down
menus for fixed fields, but not for variable fields (although I recently
suggested to a rep from the company that a useful upgrade for the software
would be to add drop down menus for controlled vocabulary RDA-based fields
throughout the MARC record).
Even better, I think, would be an entire overhaul of the inputting screen.
Related values shouldn't be scattered all over the place. Inputting should
bring together the human-readable form, the normalized or coded form,
related notes, and preview displays of records and generated icons. Because
RDA elements for relationships are based on FRBR entities, there is also an
implication there for how inputting screens should be organized.
Thomas Brenndorfer
Guelph Public Library
Re: [RDA-L] If we don't adopt RDA immediately
John Hostage said:
Bracket adjacent element in the same field, e.g., 260 |a[S.l.
:|b[s.n.],|c[2010?].
RDA does not use these abbreviations.
No. But ISBD does. Those long screen eating phrases will be separately
bracketed as shown. This is also an ISBD provision.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
[RDA-L] Unsubscribe RDA-L Anna Clifton
Anna Clifton | Librarian | Land Environment Court Library | Department of Justice Attorney General Email: anna_clif...@agd.nsw.gov.au | Phone: 02 9113 8254 | Fax: 02 9113 8255 225 Macquarie Street SYDNEY NSW 2000 | DX 829, Sydney | GPO Box 1484, Sydney NSW 2001 Department of Justice and Attorney General - Promoting a Just and Safe Society Visit us at www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au Please consider our environment before printing this email. This email and any attachments may be confidential and contain privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this communication. If you have received this message in error please delete and notify the sender. When communicating by email you consent to the monitoring and recording of that correspondence.
Re: [RDA-L] Uniform title for treaties
John Hostage said:
Not clear what the second sentence means. Uniform titles for treaties
entered under a jurisdiction have been in subfield $t of 110 in
authority records and of 710 in bib records, or in 240 of bib records,
for 30 years.
110 1_ |a South Africa (Republic). |k Treaties, etc.
|b Botswana, August 24 and September 4, 1973.
Our files of full of these $kTreaties, etc. uniform titles for
in 110 entries for treaties. And so is the LC online catalogue.
It is my understanding that these will be be in 240.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Uniform title for treaties
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod [m...@slc.bc.ca] Sent: February-17-11 8:03 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Uniform title for treaties John Hostage said: Not clear what the second sentence means. Uniform titles for treaties entered under a jurisdiction have been in subfield $t of 110 in authority records and of 710 in bib records, or in 240 of bib records, for 30 years. 110 1_ |a South Africa (Republic). |k Treaties, etc. |b Botswana, August 24 and September 4, 1973. Our files of full of these $kTreaties, etc. uniform titles for in 110 entries for treaties. And so is the LC online catalogue. It is my understanding that these will be be in 240. --- From http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bdx10.html X10 - Corporate Names - General Information: $k - Form subheading Prior to 1981, the title Treaties, etc. was considered a form subheading and coded subfield $k. It was in the change from AACR1 to AACR2 that Treaties, etc. became a uniform title and not a form subheading. In RDA, Treaties, etc. is a value for the element Preferred Title for the Work. There are specific guidelines for the preferred title of a legal work, with Treaties, etc. covered by RDA 6.19.2.7. The preferred title for the work is the same as the uniform title (without qualifiers, since qualifiers are different elements in RDA). Authorized access points have their own guidelines for construction. Treaties between national governments are covered by 6.29.1.15. The authorized access point is constructed by combining other elements, specifically: Authorized access point for the government + Preferred title for the work (which would be Treaties, etc.) which would form authorized access points like: United States. Treaties, etc. RDA 6.29.1.15, AACR2 21.35A1, and AACR1 25A1 have different rules for the sequence for the heading/authorized access point for a treaty between two governments: AACR1 25A1- first choice goes to country of cataloguing agency if country is signatory (otherwise to country first in alphabetical order) AACR2 21.35A1 - first choice goes to country first in alphabetical order RDA 6.29.1.15 - first choice goes to country named first in resources embodying the resource, or named first in reference sources Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
Re: [RDA-L] Uniform title for treaties
J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote: 110 1_ |a South Africa (Republic). |k Treaties, etc. |b Botswana, August 24 and September 4, 1973. Our files of full of these $kTreaties, etc. uniform titles for in 110 entries for treaties. And so is the LC online catalogue. It is my understanding that these will be be in 240. They already are. Some examples more recent than the record for the treaty between South Africa and Botswana. http://lccn.loc.gov/92226545 http://lccn.loc.gov/2003618901 http://lccn.loc.gov/84137993 http://lccn.loc.gov/84256799 http://lccn.loc.gov/2006615116 http://lccn.loc.gov/2006359440 -- Mark K. Ehlert Minitex Coordinator University of Minnesota Bibliographic Technical 15 Andersen Library Services (BATS) Unit 222 21st Avenue South Phone: 612-624-0805 Minneapolis, MN 55455-0439 http://www.minitex.umn.edu/
Re: [RDA-L] Scripts for updating retrospectively
If/when RDA is adopted by the national cataloguing agencies, and we
must integrate them with our older AACR2, records, there are some
things we *must* do to avoid split files, and some things we *could*
do to create greater uniformity in display.
A talk containing scripts you can pass along to your programmers may be
found at:
http://slc.bc.ca/mac/rda_talk.pdf
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
