I've been following this discussion with interest, but feel the need to
inject an unhappy reality into it. I attended a program on Friday, given by
a Digital Strategist, an ALA mover and shaker. This person dismissed
all of cataloging in a single sentence, offhand, while discussing something
else.
I concur. very nice summation. Change needs to occur, but it seems to me
it's going in the wrong direction too.
Guy Frost, B.M.E., M.M.E., M.L.S., Ed.S
Catalog Librarian/Facilitator of Technical Processing
Associate Professor of Library Science
Odum Library, Valdosta State University
The work Austen, Jane, 1775-1817. Pride and prejudice would be found in a
700, as a way of indicating a relationship. There will also likely be a 500
note like Based on the novel by Jane Austen. The person entity, Jane Austen,
doesn't have a relationship to the work as a motion picture, nor is
I also agree. Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA
implementation. Perhaps this message would be an appropriate response. That
position paper seems oblivious to the current 'real' environment.
Mary Charles Lasater
Authorities Coordinator
Vanderbilt University
From: Resource
Here, here!
... well said.
R.
--
Robert C.W. Hall, Jr.
Technical Services Associate Librarian
Concord Free Public Library, Concord, MA 01742
978-318-3343 -- FAX: 978-318-3344 -- http://www.concordlibrary.org/
bh...@minlib.net
--
-Original Message-
From: Lasater, Mary Charles
Debirah Tomares said:
Her vision includes librarians facilitating discovery of soft
sources of information (her words), as opposed to authoritative [i.e.,
published] sources. In doing so, she said (roughly paraphrasing): Those
sources all have records in OCLC anyway ...
Of the special libraries
My experience leads me to the opposite conclusion. For people who don't already
know how to catalog, much of RDA *is* simpler, more transparent, and so forth
than AACR2. It's only those of us who have been using AACR2 for years that have
so much trouble grasping the new rules.
In my job I teach
Mac (and others):
I didn't mean that the Digital Strategist was right--obviously, as a
cataloger, I know the contrary. Just that that is often the opinion of
those movers and shakers, and I don't see how we can convince them that
a: their glib assumptions are wrong, and b: it still matters to
It may be simplistic (but hey! that's what I do!), but I think the competing
views of RDA's potential benefits and ultimate utility split along the lines of
what kind of libraries are being discussed and what kind of libraries the
individuals doing the discussing inhabit. With a few significant
Well, you can't stop there, Mike.
Which kinds of libraries favor which, etc.?
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
snip
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA implementation. Perhaps
this message would be an appropriate response. That position paper seems
oblivious to the current 'real' environment.
snip
Mary,
Where did you see this report? Do you have a link to it?
Thanks,
Aleta
Well, you can't stop there, Mike.
Which kinds of libraries favor which, etc.?
To answer Kathleen's perfectly reasonable question and observation in reverse
order:
I'd rather not say publically at this point in this fascinating discussion
(though I think a close reading of my previous postings
Having cataloged for nearly 22 years at two institutions, having dealt with
many changes involving bibliographic utility and online cataloging software
upgrades, and having conversed casually with actual participants in the RDA
test, I am cautiously optimistic: if RDA is adopted, there will be
Megan:
I think you have it absolutely right.
One of our big problems with making a transition to RDA is that we do
not yet have tools to manage our data using RDA, and so it's difficult
to visualize how the different approach to data will change what
catalogers do (and what libraries do,
Aleta Copeland acopel...@oplib.org wrote:
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA implementation. Perhaps
this message would be an appropriate response. That position paper seems
oblivious to the current ‘real’ environment.
Where did you see this report? Do you have a link to it?
Your comments are very interesting, but I have to wonder if there are not
additional reasons. I was a copy cataloger for two years before I went to
library school in 1981, where the cataloging course consisted of a glossed
reading of AACR2, plus some wonderful optional readings and a few
Harden, Jean wrote:
snip
My experience leads me to the opposite conclusion. For people who don’t already
know how to catalog, much of RDA *is* simpler, more transparent, and so forth
than AACR2. It’s only those of us who have been using AACR2 for years that have
so much trouble grasping the new
Mary Charles Lasater wrote:
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA
implementation. [...] That
position paper seems oblivious to the current 'real' environment.
Mary, could you give some specific reasons why you say that about the
position paper? To me it seems like it couldn't
Quoting Weinheimer Jim j.weinhei...@aur.edu:
I have no doubt that experienced catalogers can learn RDA. After
all, the final product is not all that different from what we do
now. The problem for experienced catalogers is to master a new set
of tools that are very expensive in comparison
Meanwhile, speculation without facts isn't terribly useful. I think about how
much of the time used up in this debate couldn't have been better spent
gathering actual information.
Well, sure, but seeing as how we're waiting on the U.S. national libraries to
come to a decision anyway it's hard
Kevin,
I agree with Laurence Creider There is a near total disconnect between the
discussion and the conclusion. I couldn't even figure out how to respond to
it.
I am not 'anti' RDA, but it is clear that RDA is not finished (subjects???) and
the Toolkit is very hard to use. Finally the TEST
Deborah Tomares said:
Those sources all have records in OCLC anyway ...
P.S. How does she think those recores *get* into OCLC? A cataloguer
creates them!
Deborah, I realize this was not your opinion, widely shared though it
be. You reported it well.
Yes, I do suspect steam is coming out of
Megan Curran said:
It seems like the goal of RDA is to bring libraries into web-based
data description in a real way.
Coding and ILS development would take us into being web-based,
not cataloguing rule changes, with rare exceptions.
I do not see in the budgets of our clients the ILSs which
I do not see in the budgets of our clients the ILSs which would be
required to take advantage of, for example, 7XX$i values expressing
relationships.
I'd say that's a failing of the ILS marketplace, not RDA. I think the ILSs are
just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling out new
Megan Curran wrote:
snip
I just feel like if our catalogs are on the web, and most of what we catalog is
in the web environment, then the rules should be made for that environment.
Using coding tricks and discovery layers to force paper-based cataloging rules
into a web environment amounts to
Not all libraries perceive the same needs as other libraries. If the ILSs are
just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling out new iterations that can
take advantage of the relational properties then why haven't they already
rolled out ILSs that feature technology [which] already exists,
Weinheimer Jim j.weinhei...@aur.edu wrote:
Which changes do you have in mind? ... The lack of the $b in titles?
Huh?
--
Mark K. Ehlert Minitex
Coordinator University of Minnesota
Bibliographic Technical 15 Andersen Library
Services (BATS) Unit
At 03:34 PM 4/11/2011, Mike Tribby wrote:
Not all libraries perceive the same needs as other libraries. If
the ILSs are just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling
out new iterations that can take advantage of the relational
properties then why haven't they already rolled out ILSs that
The questions above indicate that the questioner is missing the point of RDA
entirely.
Of course they do. Has this list outlived its usefulness?
Mike Tribby
Senior Cataloger
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses
mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com
Hi, Thanks, Mr. Cronin - that was quite useful to see how it worked for your
folks. I sent it to staff here for their review.
For the list, I have a question which I can't remember seeing addressed here,
or maybe it was a long time ago. Will archival cataloging, such as the use of
DACS, be
I agree. We are swimming against the tide.
Marilyn Montalvo
Head Technical Services Dept.
Library System
University of
Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras Campus
Every time I see a
discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand (which
it is),
how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which it is), and
31 matches
Mail list logo
