Re: [RDA-L] Bib records with uniform titles for the Bible
It usually takes overnight for ours to flip. Did you check again this morning? Joan On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote: I just checked ours. The authority records for Bible have been loaded, but none of the entries were changed, either subject or title (130 and 730) On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: How delightful. I find we have a little puddle also... All of the bib records that I have checked so far have a previous entry for Bible.|p Acts. that was properly flipped. I wonder if they weren't busied still when the time came to flip the headings that didn't get flipped. (We have good 130s and 630s with bad 730s). Not sure what order III's AACP works on the records, but this might be what happened. If this is right, just open the authority record for Bible N.T. Acts. Suppress it. Close the record. Open it and again and unsuppress it. This will force a re-index for the record that will make it run through the AACP process again. Check tomorrow morning and see if your truants are still there. If they are, I'ld suggest using the Global update module. If this is right; there will be a lot of us in this same boat. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.eduwrote: Dear RDA-Lers, On Friday my colleague loaded the new authority records for all of the New Testament headings. When we looked at our Millennium catalog this morning, all the headings had flipped. However bib records with 730s such as Bible. N.T. Acts. English aren't affected by the new authority records. Can anyone offer advice on what to do about this? Do we need to go in and change these Uniform Titles one by one? Thank you! Joan -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only. -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Bib records with uniform titles for the Bible
We had a bunch without any subfield codes. They have to be tended by hand. On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.eduwrote: It usually takes overnight for ours to flip. Did you check again this morning? Joan On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote: I just checked ours. The authority records for Bible have been loaded, but none of the entries were changed, either subject or title (130 and 730) On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: How delightful. I find we have a little puddle also... All of the bib records that I have checked so far have a previous entry for Bible.|p Acts. that was properly flipped. I wonder if they weren't busied still when the time came to flip the headings that didn't get flipped. (We have good 130s and 630s with bad 730s). Not sure what order III's AACP works on the records, but this might be what happened. If this is right, just open the authority record for Bible N.T. Acts. Suppress it. Close the record. Open it and again and unsuppress it. This will force a re-index for the record that will make it run through the AACP process again. Check tomorrow morning and see if your truants are still there. If they are, I'ld suggest using the Global update module. If this is right; there will be a lot of us in this same boat. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.eduwrote: Dear RDA-Lers, On Friday my colleague loaded the new authority records for all of the New Testament headings. When we looked at our Millennium catalog this morning, all the headings had flipped. However bib records with 730s such as Bible. N.T. Acts. English aren't affected by the new authority records. Can anyone offer advice on what to do about this? Do we need to go in and change these Uniform Titles one by one? Thank you! Joan -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only. -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu
[RDA-L] Matter of possible concern
I notice with the flood of Phase 2 authority records that there are a number of preferred access points (used to be uniform titles) of the form Works. Selections. English. date, where the date does not conform to the date in my catalog for the particular item (embodying a work). I have been wondering how to handle these. 1. 240 Works Selections English 1993 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where the 240 matches the authority record or 2. 240 Works. Selections. English. 1994 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where I have to create a new authority record (yuck) or edit the one sent from LC/NACO (yucker) or just leave the mismatch as it is (yuckest) I have seen enough dates in authority records that came from CIP or eCIP and are not accurate when compared to the piece in hand to have very little doubt where the root of the problem is. The long term solution is to change over to unchanging numeric identifiers with varying forms of display (as we all know), but before we reach Nirvana, what do we do? Any thoughts? -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Bib records with uniform titles for the Bible
Just checked ours again. We have several under Bible. Genesis And also many under Bible. O.T. Genesis. Ain't automation wonderful. On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:40 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: We had a bunch without any subfield codes. They have to be tended by hand. On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.eduwrote: It usually takes overnight for ours to flip. Did you check again this morning? Joan On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote: I just checked ours. The authority records for Bible have been loaded, but none of the entries were changed, either subject or title (130 and 730) On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: How delightful. I find we have a little puddle also... All of the bib records that I have checked so far have a previous entry for Bible.|p Acts. that was properly flipped. I wonder if they weren't busied still when the time came to flip the headings that didn't get flipped. (We have good 130s and 630s with bad 730s). Not sure what order III's AACP works on the records, but this might be what happened. If this is right, just open the authority record for Bible N.T. Acts. Suppress it. Close the record. Open it and again and unsuppress it. This will force a re-index for the record that will make it run through the AACP process again. Check tomorrow morning and see if your truants are still there. If they are, I'ld suggest using the Global update module. If this is right; there will be a lot of us in this same boat. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.eduwrote: Dear RDA-Lers, On Friday my colleague loaded the new authority records for all of the New Testament headings. When we looked at our Millennium catalog this morning, all the headings had flipped. However bib records with 730s such as Bible. N.T. Acts. English aren't affected by the new authority records. Can anyone offer advice on what to do about this? Do we need to go in and change these Uniform Titles one by one? Thank you! Joan -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only. -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only.
Re: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern
It strikes me that the whole idea of including the date in the u.t. was to alert the patron (remember him/her?) to the edition or printing if you will, of the work desired. Or is RDA forgetting about the goals of FRBR (i.e. updates of Cutter's goals)? On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.eduwrote: I notice with the flood of Phase 2 authority records that there are a number of preferred access points (used to be uniform titles) of the form Works. Selections. English. date, where the date does not conform to the date in my catalog for the particular item (embodying a work). I have been wondering how to handle these. 1. 240 Works Selections English 1993 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where the 240 matches the authority record or 2. 240 Works. Selections. English. 1994 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where I have to create a new authority record (yuck) or edit the one sent from LC/NACO (yucker) or just leave the mismatch as it is (yuckest) I have seen enough dates in authority records that came from CIP or eCIP and are not accurate when compared to the piece in hand to have very little doubt where the root of the problem is. The long term solution is to change over to unchanging numeric identifiers with varying forms of display (as we all know), but before we reach Nirvana, what do we do? Any thoughts? -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only.
Re: [RDA-L] Bib records with uniform titles for the Bible
We've not yet come to the point where changed authority records for Bible are loaded into our local catalog. I notice OCLC's authority file already reflects this change but OCLC bibs, even those with controlled headings, do not. Perhaps someone will know: Are heading changes in existing OCLC bib records to follow in a few days, months, years??? Jack Jack Wu Franciscan University of Steubenville j...@franciscan.edu Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu 3/26/2013 9:40 AM We had a bunch without any subfield codes. They have to be tended by hand. On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.edu wrote: It usually takes overnight for ours to flip. Did you check again this morning? Joan On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu wrote: I just checked ours. The authority records for Bible have been loaded, but none of the entries were changed, either subject or title (130 and 730) On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Adger Williams awilli...@colgate.edu wrote: How delightful. I find we have a little puddle also... All of the bib records that I have checked so far have a previous entry for Bible.|p Acts. that was properly flipped. I wonder if they weren't busied still when the time came to flip the headings that didn't get flipped. (We have good 130s and 630s with bad 730s). Not sure what order III's AACP works on the records, but this might be what happened. If this is right, just open the authority record for Bible N.T. Acts. Suppress it. Close the record. Open it and again and unsuppress it. This will force a re-index for the record that will make it run through the AACP process again. Check tomorrow morning and see if your truants are still there. If they are, I'ld suggest using the Global update module. If this is right; there will be a lot of us in this same boat. On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.edu wrote: Dear RDA-Lers, On Friday my colleague loaded the new authority records for all of the New Testament headings. When we looked at our Millennium catalog this morning, all the headings had flipped. However bib records with 730s such as Bible. N.T. Acts. English aren't affected by the new authority records. Can anyone offer advice on what to do about this? Do we need to go in and change these Uniform Titles one by one? Thank you! Joan -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 ( tel:937-229-4075 ) jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 ( tel:315-228-7310 ) awilli...@colgate.edu -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edu Claremont School of Theology and Claremont Lincoln University do not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any of the information or content contained in this forwarded email. The forwarded email is that of the original sender and does not represent the views of Claremont School of Theology or Claremont Lincoln University. It has been forwarded as a courtesy for information only. -- Joan Milligan Catalog and Metadata Specialist University of Dayton Libraries 300 College Park Dayton, Ohio 45469-1360 937-229-4075 ( tel:937-229-4075 ) jmillig...@udayton.edu -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edu Scanned by for virus, malware and spam by SCM appliance
Re: [RDA-L] Bib records with uniform titles for the Bible
I don’t have the automated authority control turned on in my Innovative installation. I’ve just downloaded and overlaid the authority records. The Global Update functionality works very well to flip the bibliographic headings – a reasonable compromise between fully automated and a one-by-one approach. I have found that it takes some care with the process, but it is mostly manageable. Caveats: 1) Do not automatically strip out all O.T. and N.T. – there are instances were these need to be flipped to Old Testament and New Testament. 2) Do not automatically flip all O.T. and N.T. to Old Testament and New Testament – there are instances where the final period (full stop) needs to be retained. 3) Make no assumptions that your ‘Find’ text corresponds to a clean data file – re-execute your search to see what “dirty data” floats to the top and hence requires manual intervention. 4) Regarding searching and downloading: There are instances in the local subject authority file where older records have either been subsumed into name authorities or deleted outright – these too require some manual grooming. John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian Schaffer Library, Union College Schenectady NY 12308 mye...@union.edumailto:mye...@union.edu 518-388-6623 On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Joan Milligan jmillig...@udayton.edumailto:jmillig...@udayton.edu wrote: On Friday my colleague loaded the new authority records for all of the New Testament headings. When we looked at our Millennium catalog this morning, all the headings had flipped. However bib records with 730s such as Bible. N.T. Acts. English aren't affected by the new authority records. Can anyone offer advice on what to do about this? Do we need to go in and change these Uniform Titles one by one?
[RDA-L] Victoria
RDA-L readers, A little more grist for the mill. While recording Victoria in field 370 of a NAR, I spent a little time looking for the qualifier. Turns out that the Australian state doesn't have one, see n 79046608. The conclusion: it, and it alone, is the unqualified Victoria. So, perhaps it should be recorded as: 370 Australia--Victoria (But DCM Z1 370 says nothing of the sort!) My understanding is that Victoria is a neighborhood in London adjoining the eponymous rail and coach stations along Buckingham Palace Road. If you find an authority record for it, you deserve high honor, if not reward. Sincerely - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
[RDA-L] AACR2 compatible records
Below is our letter to clients announcing SLC's implementing
RDA September 1st, and offering AACR2 compatible export of
RDA records.
So far, most libraries are opting from AACR2 compatible
(because of the GMD), and most e-publishers are opting for
both RDA and AACR2 compatible to give their clients the choice.
Should SLC offer to receive RDA records as a .mrc file to
m...@elrod.ca, and return AACR2 compatible records at $.50 each,
with a minimum batch size of 40 records? Would many non client
libraries be interested in such a service?
===
Dear SLC Client, 18 March 2013
Executive summary:
SLC will implement the new cataloguing rules Resource Description and
Access (RDA) September 1st, 2013. This date was selected because
several of you use ebrary for record distribution; ebrary will accept
not RDA records prior to October, and no AACR2 records after that
time.
Batches of records will be all AACR2 prior to September 1st, all RDA
or RDA exported as AACR2 compatible thereafter.
We need to know whether after September 1st you wish RDA records,
AACR2 compatible records, or both (if you are an aggregator or
publisher' the additional format would be $1.00 per record).
Canadian clients receiving RDA will be sent $4 relator codes following
entries, e.g., $4aut for author, as per Library and Archives Canada
practice. American clients will be sent $e relator terms following
entries, as per Library of Congress practice, e.g., $eauthor.
We look forward to hearing your choices.
=
RDA changes:
In both RDA and AACR2 compatible records, there will be a difference
in form of entry for the books of the Bible, the Qur'an, and
treaties.* There will be a difference in the choice of main entry,
e.g., always first author regardless of number.
In RDA records, most abbreviations will be spelled out; there will be
no General Material Designations (GMD) in 245$h, e.g.. 245
$h[electronic resource] will be lacking. Instead there are three new
media MARC fields, 336-338, e.g.:
336 $atext$2rdacontent
337 $aelectronic$2isbdmedia**
338 $aonline resource$2rdacarrier
===
AACR2 compatible records:
If you opt for AACR2 compatible records, the 245$h GMD would be
inserted; relator codes after entries would be removed; words normally
abbreviated would be abbreviated (e.g. 100 pages would be 100 p.);
336-338 media terms would be removed.
===
For library clients, changes to your database and ILS required:
Whether or not you opt to accept unchanged RDA records or AACR2
compatible ones, changes to your Integrated Library System (ILS) will
be required to deal with the changes in form of some entries*.
If you opt for RDA records, you will also need to deal with the
absence of GMD and the new media fields 336-338. We suggest icons,
or mapping to displaying two of the new MARC media fields [338 : 336]
at end of 245$a title proper, or at head of all data, e.g., [online
resource : text].
A fuller list of RDA/AACR2 differences can be sent if you wish, along
with SLC intended choices among RDA's many options.
===
Aggregators and publishers:
Those of you who distribute MARC records with electronic publications
may wish to consult your clients whether they would prefer AACR2
compatible records, or RDA ones, in deciding whether to offer one,
the other, or the choice of either.
The charge for receiving AACR2 compatible versions along with RDA
versions, so you may offer the choice, would be $1.00 per record. We
can also provide UKMARC versions.
===
Open source (i.e. low cost) ILS for libraries:
Koha: http://koha-community.org/demo/
Evergreen: http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=community_servers
If you as a library find having changes made to your ILS to
incorporate RDA too expensive, you might consider one of the two open
source ILS given above. I'm told one has the ability to translate $4
relator codes into terms.
Using one of these open source ILS would mean you need inhouse IT folk to
configure it. With the possibility of MARC being replaced by Bibframe
(markup coding), this is not a good time to invest in an ILS.
===
Sincerely, Mac
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
*O.T, and N.T. are removed from between Bible and the name of a
book, spelled out if the
Re: [RDA-L] Victoria
Actually if you are recording the state of Victoria in the 370, current policy and RDA instructions tell you to use the abbreviations for places in Appendix B.11, which means that you would record the form that would be used if the place were being added as a qualifier: Vic. Recording Victoria spelled out is not correct according to current policy. Adam ^^ Adam L. Schiff Principal Cataloger University of Washington Libraries Box 352900 Seattle, WA 98195-2900 (206) 543-8409 (206) 685-8782 fax asch...@u.washington.edu http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff ~~ On Tue, 26 Mar 2013, Ian Fairclough wrote: RDA-L readers, A little more grist for the mill. While recording Victoria in field 370 of a NAR, I spent a little time looking for the qualifier. Turns out that the Australian state doesn't have one, see n 79046608. The conclusion: it, and it alone, is the unqualified Victoria. So, perhaps it should be recorded as: 370 Australia--Victoria (But DCM Z1 370 says nothing of the sort!) My understanding is that Victoria is a neighborhood in London adjoining the eponymous rail and coach stations along Buckingham Palace Road. If you find an authority record for it, you deserve high honor, if not reward. Sincerely - Ian Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
[RDA-L] Victoria
RDA-L readers, Thanks to Adam Schiff for his correction. All is now clear - perhaps. Once again, I feel like I've been booby-trapped. Like many aspects of contemporary cataloging, mine was an error just waiting to happen. DCM Z1 370 has: Use the established form of the geographic place name as found in the LC/NAF, with the same adjustments as when using the place name as a parenthetical qualifier to names. (Note: The phrase parenthetical qualifier retrieves no results when used in the RDA Quick Search box.) 9.11.1.3 Recording Places of Residence has Record the place or places (town, city, province, state, and/or country) in which the person resides or has resided. Record the place name as instructed in chapter 16. Abbreviate the names of countries, states, provinces, territories, etc., as instructed in appendix B (B.11), as applicable. And yes, there in B.11, Victoria is abbreviated Vic. One can be quite clear about this, provided you've read and understood the instructions at the head: Use the abbreviations in table B.1 for the names of certain countries and for the names of states, provinces, territories, etc., of Australia, Canada, and the United States when the names are recorded: a) as part of the name of a place located in that state, province, territory, etc. (see 16.2.2.9) or other jurisdiction (see 16.2.2.11) b) as the name or part of the name of a place associated with a person (see 9.8–9.11) family (see 10.5), or corporate body (see 11.3). Do not abbreviate the name of a city or town even if it has the same name as a state, etc., listed in table B.1 (e.g., Washington, D.C. not Wash., D.C.). Do not abbreviate any place name that is not in the list. In my opinion this is AACR2 legacy thinking, and it's time to get rid of these abbreviations. If you must spell out approximately, when approx. and c. are in common usage in the English-speaking world, then abbreviating as Vic. for the supposed benefit of people some of whom won't even know it's an Australian state is not helpful. Good luck with compliance on this one. Is there now a chorus of Yes, we know! and We'll change those instructions as soon as we can!? - Ian P.S. I changed Victoria to Vic. in the draft NAR awaiting review. But I'm tempted to change it back :-) Ian Fairclough - George Mason University - ifairclough43...@yahoo.com
Re: [RDA-L] AACR2 compatible records--Personal reply
Deborah Fritz said:
But Mac, what is the point of offering to change spelled out forms of words
to abbreviations and remove 33X fields to make RDA records backwards
compatible with AACR records when OCLC is intending to run machine
conversions to do the reverse and spell out abbreviations and add 33X fields
to make AACR records compatible with RDA records?
What is in OCLC is irrelevant to many libraries. What is relevant is
what is in their databases, and what their ILS can accommodate.
This is the worst possible time economically for libraries to have to
incur expense to change their ILSs. Many lack the inhouse IT skills
to download and use one of the freeware ILSs.
We will of course be loading unchanged RDA records to OCLC, for those
clients who have us load, regardless of what is sent the client.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern
There is no equivalent to LCRI 25.8/25.9 (adding a date to Works/Selections) in RDA or the LC PCC PS as far as I know, so maybe you don’t have a problem? Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adger Williams Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 11:19 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern I notice with the flood of Phase 2 authority records that there are a number of preferred access points (used to be uniform titles) of the form Works. Selections. English. date, where the date does not conform to the date in my catalog for the particular item (embodying a work). I have been wondering how to handle these. 1. 240 Works Selections English 1993 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where the 240 matches the authority record or 2. 240 Works. Selections. English. 1994 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where I have to create a new authority record (yuck) or edit the one sent from LC/NACO (yucker) or just leave the mismatch as it is (yuckest) I have seen enough dates in authority records that came from CIP or eCIP and are not accurate when compared to the piece in hand to have very little doubt where the root of the problem is. The long term solution is to change over to unchanging numeric identifiers with varying forms of display (as we all know), but before we reach Nirvana, what do we do? Any thoughts? -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edumailto:awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern
If the date in the authority record is a mistake, it should be corrected. However, remember that a date that is used to differentiate in an authorized access point should be the date of the work (RDA 6.4 and 6.27.1.9b) or (in this case) the date of the expression (RDA 6.10 and 6.27.3ii), which might not be the same date as the publication date (that is, is the date of the manifestation) (e.g. if you have a reprint or republication of an earlier “Selections” both should share the same authorized access point since they’re the same aggregate work). In AACR2 we were in the habit because of the LCRI of automatically adding the publication date to “Works” and “Selections” but this isn’t the RDA practice (though inevitably because of the Phase II procedure all those AACR2 records have been recoded to RDA with possibly inappropriate years attached). Note also that date isn’t the only thing you can use in RDA to qualify “Works” or “Works. Selections”. You can use the form of the work, the date of the work, the place of origin of the work, or anything else that makes sense to distinguish it from other collections. We need to get out of the always add the year” mode and think about what makes most sense to distinguish this collection of works or selections from others. Bob Robert L. Maxwell Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept. 6728 Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 (801)422-5568 We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued--Eliza R. Snow, 1842. From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adger Williams Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 9:19 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern I notice with the flood of Phase 2 authority records that there are a number of preferred access points (used to be uniform titles) of the form Works. Selections. English. date, where the date does not conform to the date in my catalog for the particular item (embodying a work). I have been wondering how to handle these. 1. 240 Works Selections English 1993 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where the 240 matches the authority record or 2. 240 Works. Selections. English. 1994 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where I have to create a new authority record (yuck) or edit the one sent from LC/NACO (yucker) or just leave the mismatch as it is (yuckest) I have seen enough dates in authority records that came from CIP or eCIP and are not accurate when compared to the piece in hand to have very little doubt where the root of the problem is. The long term solution is to change over to unchanging numeric identifiers with varying forms of display (as we all know), but before we reach Nirvana, what do we do? Any thoughts? -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edumailto:awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern
Steven’s point reminds me. In addition to what I said about qualifiers on my earlier post, remember also you only need to add a qualifier (date, form of work, place of origin, something else) if you need to differentiate. So if a person’s works (or a selection) have only been published once, there’s no conflict, no need to qualify. “Smith, Jane. Works” without qualification works perfectly well. This was not the practice under the LCRI to AACR2 which required a year to be added to Works or Selections whether or not there was a need to differentiate. Bob Robert L. Maxwell Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept. 6728 Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 (801)422-5568 We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to the course which has been heretofore pursued--Eliza R. Snow, 1842. From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Arakawa, Steven Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:30 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern There is no equivalent to LCRI 25.8/25.9 (adding a date to Works/Selections) in RDA or the LC PCC PS as far as I know, so maybe you don’t have a problem? Steven Arakawa Catalog Librarian for Training Documentation Catalog Metada Services Sterling Memorial Library. Yale University P.O. Box 208240 New Haven, CT 06520-8240 (203) 432-8286 steven.arak...@yale.edumailto:steven.arak...@yale.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]mailto:[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adger Williams Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 11:19 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CAmailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Matter of possible concern I notice with the flood of Phase 2 authority records that there are a number of preferred access points (used to be uniform titles) of the form Works. Selections. English. date, where the date does not conform to the date in my catalog for the particular item (embodying a work). I have been wondering how to handle these. 1. 240 Works Selections English 1993 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where the 240 matches the authority record or 2. 240 Works. Selections. English. 1994 245 Antonio Gramsci : pre-prison writings 260 |c1994 where I have to create a new authority record (yuck) or edit the one sent from LC/NACO (yucker) or just leave the mismatch as it is (yuckest) I have seen enough dates in authority records that came from CIP or eCIP and are not accurate when compared to the piece in hand to have very little doubt where the root of the problem is. The long term solution is to change over to unchanging numeric identifiers with varying forms of display (as we all know), but before we reach Nirvana, what do we do? Any thoughts? -- Adger Williams Colgate University Library 315-228-7310 awilli...@colgate.edumailto:awilli...@colgate.edu
Re: [RDA-L] AACR2 compatible records--Personal reply
Although many libraries don't use OCLC directly, they do end up copying
records from the catalogs of libraries that do. And if OCLC does what they
say they will, even the national libraries will probably have to follow
suit. So I fear that libraries are just going to have to get used to their
records looking either pure AACR, or pure RDA, or a total hybrid mix.
Believe me, I struggled with this, but I am resigned to making MARC Report
less rigid to accommodate the new reality.
Sigh
Deborah
- - - - - - - -
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
debo...@marcofquality.com
www.marcofquality.com
-Original Message-
From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 6:16 PM
To: debo...@marcofquality.com
Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] AACR2 compatible records--Personal reply
Deborah Fritz said:
But Mac, what is the point of offering to change spelled out forms of
words to abbreviations and remove 33X fields to make RDA records
backwards compatible with AACR records when OCLC is intending to run
machine conversions to do the reverse and spell out abbreviations and
add 33X fields to make AACR records compatible with RDA records?
What is in OCLC is irrelevant to many libraries. What is relevant is what
is in their databases, and what their ILS can accommodate.
This is the worst possible time economically for libraries to have to incur
expense to change their ILSs. Many lack the inhouse IT skills to download
and use one of the freeware ILSs.
We will of course be loading unchanged RDA records to OCLC, for those
clients who have us load, regardless of what is sent the client.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
