Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Yeah There's no I in RDA, guys
!!
Unhelpfully (but hoping to be excused because it's Friday),
John
John Wagstaff
Head, Music Performing Arts Library
Interim Head, Literatures and Languages Library
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1114 W. Nevada Street
Urbana IL61801
Tel. 217-244-4070
e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Cindy Wolff
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 3:23 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
If I want an English translation of a work, why would I want to
know about the original and other translations?
I think the operative word here is I. What if
someone else wants to know, either a researcher or a library staff member
doing collection development?
The catalog serves many purposes
for many types of users on many levels, which makes it hard to fit into a
retail model of I want it, here it is. The catalog is part of
the research process in addition to being a delivery mechanism.
Cindy Wolff
James said:
The structure of the card catalog allowed people to do the FRBR user
tasks (where--for those who understood--people really and truly could
find/identify/select/obtain works/expressions/manifestation/items by
their authors/titles/subjects (or at least they could if the catalogers
had done their jobs correctly).
I am second to none in deploring the loss of some features of the card
catalogue. But in addition to cataloguers doing their job, those
cards had to be filed. At the end of the card catalogue era, this was
becoming increasingly difficult in larger academic institutions. Some
student filers were dumping cards rather that filing them. Escaping
card filing was a major improvement provided by OPACs, right up there
with keyword searching. In Canada, micro or print catalgues produced
by Utlas ending filing for many libraries prior to OPACs.
I agree with your basic position on FRBR. If I want an English
translation of a work, why would I want to know about the original and
other translations? Certainly I am not interested in knowing about
resources not in the collection, when looking for immediate access.
Few libraries for which we catalogue would have the array of related
expressions and manifestations to display.
Since in Bibframe translations are different works rather than
different expressions of one work, FRBR does not seem to be central to
Bibframe's structure, although there will be links relating these
works. Unfortunately, FRBR and WEMI organization of RDA do make RDA
difficult to comprehend. Theory trumped pragmatism.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.camailto:m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Maybe teacher and student would work..
...Or somebody's first cousin.
John
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Adam L. Schiff
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 8:32 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
That would be a naughty designator rather than an inappropriate one!
It's way before Friday for humor, isn't it? ;0)
On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Kevin M Randall wrote:
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:29:48 +
From: Kevin M Randall k...@northwestern.edu
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Like one that would be used for a particular work by Nathaniel Hawthorne, I
suppose?
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and
Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Wagstaff, D
John
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:23 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Can anyone point me to an inappropriate relationship designator?
That sounds a lot more fun...
(Sorry, but I couldn't resist.)
John
John Wagstaff
Head, Music Performing Arts Library University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign
1114 W. Nevada Street
Urbana IL61801
Tel. 217-244-4070
e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu
-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: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:20 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Lynne asked:
In this case, do I simply add the corporate name heading (access
point) without any relationship designator even though the Natural
History Museum holds the copyright ...
Kevin advises no relationship designator if none applies, Another
poster has advised that if no exact term works, use the larger
category. even if not the the lists. (The MRIs add those categories
to its list.) In this case you might consider $ecreator. The body
has a more important relationship to the item than just holding the
copyright.
You are right, I think, that the terms from the $4 code list should
not be used in $e. You could use the $4 code, but as I said, the
relationship is larger and more important than just copyright holder, so I
would not.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__
\__
^^
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
~~
Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Can anyone point me to an inappropriate relationship designator? That sounds
a lot more fun...
(Sorry, but I couldn't resist.)
John
John Wagstaff
Head, Music Performing Arts Library
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
1114 W. Nevada Street
Urbana IL61801
Tel. 217-244-4070
e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu
-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: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:20 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Appropriate Relationship Designator
Lynne asked:
In this case, do I simply add the corporate name heading (access point)
without any relationship designator even though the Natural History
Museum holds the copyright ...
Kevin advises no relationship designator if none applies, Another poster has
advised that if no exact term works, use the larger category. even if not the
the lists. (The MRIs add those categories to its list.) In this case you
might consider $ecreator. The body has a more important relationship to the
item than just holding the copyright.
You are right, I think, that the terms from the $4 code list should not be used
in $e. You could use the $4 code, but as I said, the relationship is larger
and more important than just copyright holder, so I would not.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] remove me
... is this the Hotel California of listservs ... You can check out any time you like, but they'll never let you leave ... Just a thought for Friday afternoon. John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070 e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Mariann Kmetz Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 3:02 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] remove me Remove me!! Mariann Kmetz Assistant Director Palmerton Area Library 610-826-3424 plab...@ptd.netmailto:plab...@ptd.net
Re: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians
Hi Debbie! I hope you're doing well. I was wondering whether you have yet had a chance to watch the two RDA music cataloging webinars by Kathy Glennan on YouTube? They might be of interest to you and other UK members of IAML. Here's the link: http://www.ala.org/alcts/confevents/upcoming/webinar/cat Otherwise, of course, I'm sure you can just put in Kathy's name on YouTube and find them that way. All best! John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Music 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070[X] e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edumailto:wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Lee, Deborah [deborah@courtauld.ac.uk] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:04 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians ***Apologies for cross-posting*** For any UK/EIRE colleagues, who may be interested in this FRBR workshop led by Anne Welsh (UCL). It is a general FRBR workshop including presentations, exercises and group discussions; however, the examples used in the workshop will be drawn from art documentation. Best wishes, Deborah Lee (secretary, ARLIS UK Ireland Cataloguing and Classification Committee) Deborah Lee Senior cataloguer Book Library Courtauld Institute of Art Somerset House Strand London WC2R 0RN Telephone: 020 7848 2905 Email: deborah@courtauld.ac.ukmailto:deborah@courtauld.ac.uk Now on at The Courtauld Gallery: Peter Lely: A Lyrical Vision 11 October 2012 – 13 January 2013 [cid:image001.png@01CDB84D.19475430] ARLIS/UK Ireland Cataloguing and Classification Committee FRBR for art librarians FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) is the conceptual basis for RDA (Resource Description and Access). With the Library of Congress and the British Library working towards full RDA implementation by 31 March 2013 and the hybrid environment of AACR2 and RDA already with us, it is essential to understand the thinking behind RDA. So if your WEMI is wobbly or your entities and their relationships are a bit muddled this is the event for you. Organised by ARLIS Cataloguing and Classification Committee, we are very pleased to announce that the half day workshop will be led by Anne Welsh, lecturer in the Department of Information Studieshttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/ at University College Londonhttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/ (UCL), with examples drawn from art documentation. The event will take place from 1 pm – 5 pm on Tuesday 18 December 2012 at the University of East London, Docklands Campus, with an opportunity for networking with fellow attendees after the event over a glass of wine or soft drink. For booking information, please see booking form below. ***Booking form*** FEES: Refreshments will be provided, but please note that attendees will need to make their own arrangements concerning lunch. ARLIS students/unwaged/retired £23 ARLIS members £45 Non-ARLIS students £28 Non-ARLIS members £55 N.B. For bookings cancelled after 4th December a charge of 10% of the total fee will be levelled. For bookings cancelled after 11th December the full fee may be charged. BOOKING: Please complete the form below and email it to Anne Newport, a.newp...@vam.ac.ukmailto:a.newp...@vam.ac.uk by 4th December. Contact: Anne Newport, National Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 2RL. Tel. +44 (0)20 7942 2390[X]. I wish to attend the ARLIS FRBR for art librarians workshop on Tuesday 18th December 2012. Please note: the details given below will be used in the compilation of a delegates list; if you do not wish your details to be included please tick this box • Please tick this box if you are a student or if you are unwaged or retired • Please state any specific dietary requirement that we should take into account: NAME: ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Tel.: Fax: Email: I enclose my cheque made payable to ARLIS/UK Ireland for £ OR Please send an invoice for £ to: Please tick this box if you require a receipt • All bookings will be acknowledged by email or telephone. The Courtauld Institute of Art is a company limited by guarantee (registered in England and Wales, number 04464432) and an exempt charity. SCT Enterprises Limited is a limited company (registered in England and Wales, number 3137515). Their registered offices are at Somerset House, Strand, London WC2R 0RN. The sale of items related to The Courtauld Gallery and its collections is managed by SCT Enterprises Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Courtauld Institute of Art. This e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended
Re: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians
My apologies for posting a (slightly) personal message to the entire list. Nonetheless I hope its content is useful to others too. John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Music 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070[X] e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edumailto:wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Lee, Deborah [deborah@courtauld.ac.uk] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 12:04 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians ***Apologies for cross-posting*** For any UK/EIRE colleagues, who may be interested in this FRBR workshop led by Anne Welsh (UCL). It is a general FRBR workshop including presentations, exercises and group discussions; however, the examples used in the workshop will be drawn from art documentation. Best wishes, Deborah Lee (secretary, ARLIS UK Ireland Cataloguing and Classification Committee) Deborah Lee Senior cataloguer Book Library Courtauld Institute of Art Somerset House Strand London WC2R 0RN Telephone: 020 7848 2905 Email: deborah@courtauld.ac.ukmailto:deborah@courtauld.ac.uk Now on at The Courtauld Gallery: Peter Lely: A Lyrical Vision 11 October 2012 – 13 January 2013 [cid:image001.png@01CDB84D.19475430] ARLIS/UK Ireland Cataloguing and Classification Committee FRBR for art librarians FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) is the conceptual basis for RDA (Resource Description and Access). With the Library of Congress and the British Library working towards full RDA implementation by 31 March 2013 and the hybrid environment of AACR2 and RDA already with us, it is essential to understand the thinking behind RDA. So if your WEMI is wobbly or your entities and their relationships are a bit muddled this is the event for you. Organised by ARLIS Cataloguing and Classification Committee, we are very pleased to announce that the half day workshop will be led by Anne Welsh, lecturer in the Department of Information Studieshttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/ at University College Londonhttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/ (UCL), with examples drawn from art documentation. The event will take place from 1 pm – 5 pm on Tuesday 18 December 2012 at the University of East London, Docklands Campus, with an opportunity for networking with fellow attendees after the event over a glass of wine or soft drink. For booking information, please see booking form below. ***Booking form*** FEES: Refreshments will be provided, but please note that attendees will need to make their own arrangements concerning lunch. ARLIS students/unwaged/retired £23 ARLIS members £45 Non-ARLIS students £28 Non-ARLIS members £55 N.B. For bookings cancelled after 4th December a charge of 10% of the total fee will be levelled. For bookings cancelled after 11th December the full fee may be charged. BOOKING: Please complete the form below and email it to Anne Newport, a.newp...@vam.ac.ukmailto:a.newp...@vam.ac.uk by 4th December. Contact: Anne Newport, National Art Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 2RL. Tel. +44 (0)20 7942 2390[X]. I wish to attend the ARLIS FRBR for art librarians workshop on Tuesday 18th December 2012. Please note: the details given below will be used in the compilation of a delegates list; if you do not wish your details to be included please tick this box • Please tick this box if you are a student or if you are unwaged or retired • Please state any specific dietary requirement that we should take into account: NAME: ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Tel.: Fax: Email: I enclose my cheque made payable to ARLIS/UK Ireland for £ OR Please send an invoice for £ to: Please tick this box if you require a receipt • All bookings will be acknowledged by email or telephone. The Courtauld Institute of Art is a company limited by guarantee (registered in England and Wales, number 04464432) and an exempt charity. SCT Enterprises Limited is a limited company (registered in England and Wales, number 3137515). Their registered offices are at Somerset House, Strand, London WC2R 0RN. The sale of items related to The Courtauld Gallery and its collections is managed by SCT Enterprises Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Courtauld Institute of Art. This e-mail, including any attachments, is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any unauthorised dissemination or copying of this e-mail or its attachments and any reliance on or use or disclosure of any information contained in them is strictly prohibited and may be illegal. If you have received this
Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?
In my local supermarket in Urbana there is one aisle for canned vegetables, and another that has canned beans. And then another, which has canned tomatoes. It may be that explaining RDA is a lot simpler than explaining *that*. If only those supermarket folks had studied thesaurus construction :-) Just a thought for Friday afternoon... John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library Interim Head, Slavic and East European Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Music 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070 e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Pat Sayre McCoy [p...@uchicago.edu] Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 3:51 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records? Can we really compare our product (metadata/bibliographic records) to a can of corn? One is simple--I want a can of corn. Supermarkets are organized with the canned vegetables together (usually) and for those who cannot read English, there is a picture of corn on the can. One could confuse corn and creamed corn, but that's about as far as it goes. Catalog users want a book/video/CD that they learned about somehow, through a book review, a radio program or in conversation. They remember part of what they need to identify the book--maybe the author or title or part of the title, and they remember the item was published/issued recently. It was about corn. Will they really be happy to browse corn in our catalogs or will they want to combine the author name (or part of the name) they remember and the part of the title they remember and then limit that to the more recent materials the library has concerning corn. Oh yes, it was in English. Never mind the Spanish stuff. Another limit. And then they find that the thing they were looking for is a book and see it's charged out but there's an electronic copy they can view. After reading a bit, they decide that this isn't what they wanted, but something else that turned up in the search list is. Back to the list to look at the next title. And the next, and the next,...until they find one they want. They might also discover by looking at other records with the author's name that the author of the book on corn they found is also the author of a book on beans, or was somehow involved in a documentary about corn. Not quite the same as picking a can off the shelf. Pat Patricia Sayre-McCoy Head of Law Cataloging and Serials D'Angelo Law Library 1121 E. 60th Street Chicago, IL 60637 p-mc...@uchicago.edu 773-702-9620 (office) 773-702-2885 (fax) -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer Sent: Friday, May 20, 2011 3:21 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA [text deleted] Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records? This shows a completely different attitude toward standards than what is in the other professions. For one thing, newer versions of standards should seek to provide improvements from what they were before, not something worse. Allowing a worse product actually says a lot. Companies whose business is storing and canning corn cannot decide on their own, without any research or discussion from the communities, to declare that the older standards were too high, that now lower standards will be allowed, say which standards they want to follow, and which standards they won't follow. But never fear, the community can trust whatever this specific organization makes because based on the expertise and professionalism of their own employees, nothing bad will happen. This is not how standards work. Any company who tried that with corn or wheat or automobile maintenance or electrical connections would be shut down, no matter how much they might proclaim that their own employees will decide to do even more than is required. Yeah, sure. I don't know how many outside would believe that. --
Re: [RDA-L] Straight jacket?
Guys, I'm sorry, I can't hold back any more. I can't find any dictionary that uses the spelling straight jacket for what should be strait jacket. A straight jacket is presumably a jacket that is, in some way, straight. A strait jacket is a restrictive garment often used for medical purposes. I am sorry to be a pedant, but I feel that a discussion has much more weight if it uses correct spellings! That said, I'm glad that there is so much useful discussion on RDA-L at the moment. All best, John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library Interim Head, Slavic and East European Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Music 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070 e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind [rochk...@jhu.edu] Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:41 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Straight jacket? I think RDA actually IS a useful first step. In our current environment, we (at least in the US) pretty much catalog FOR MARC. MARC serves as our 'data vocabulary', and even our rules for entry in many cases come either from MARC itself, or are formulated in terms of marc fields. This makes it VERY hard to switch to something else, because our entire practice is based on MARC, it's not just a data format, it's our data vocabulary and a large part of our entry guidelines too. (AACR2 in theory uses ISBD as a data vocabulary, but this ends up being more or less irrelevant to our actual practice, ISBD is way too basic for our actual data, and doesn't really match MARC, where we actually put the stuff, very well at all -- even less well than RDA's data vocabulary). RDA, by attempting to seperate out the data vocabulary and entry guidelines, make them completely free-standing and unrelated to any specific record encoding formats -- is a CRUCIAL step to swapping out MARC for for something else. Because if you can move to thinking in terms of RDA, with MARC just being one possible (very imperfect) way to encode your RDA data, then switching to something else is _just_ switching your encoding, not simultaneously switching your data vocabulary and entry guidance at the same time. And, if this can be done well, data can even be automatically converted between MARC and that other (or those others) encoding formats -- although certainly not perfectly because MARC encodes RDA so imperfectly at present (for instance mushing together various RDA elements into one MARC subfield in the 300 and other places). (Incremental changes/enhancements to match RDA data vocabulary better would be one way forward). If a software systems rules can be written in terms of RDA instead of MARC, with a separate layer that simply reads/writes from MARC as an encoding to an internal RDA-data-vocabulary based representation, then the same software system could even deal with MARC and some non-MARC RDA encoding simultaneously. The challenges here are again the mismatch between MARC and RDA -- not only the loss of 'granularity' when putting RDA in MARC as above, but possibly some crucial data elements that are in MARC but aren't yet actually included in the RDA data vocabulary at all. (And incremental changes to RDA data vocabulary to match anything 'important' in MARC currently left out would be one way forward on that side). But a future encoding format based on RDA won't have this problem -- precisely because the data vocabulary of RDA has been formally described (thanks a lot to the DCMI/RDA group for much of this), so it is straightforward to make sure your encoding format matches it properly, and that multiple encoding formats that match it properly can all be converted to and from one another. So it's a challenge, for sure. But I can't think of any way to approach it _except_ trying to separate the encoding from the specification of data vocabulary and entry rules (those latter two should themselves ideally be seperated as well). Which is what FRBR/RDA is trying to do. (I say FRBR/RDA, because FRBR was sort of the first basic sketch of a data vocabulary -- RDA takes FRBR's work and refines it a bit in the process of creating entry rules and making sure they align with the specified data vocabulary. At least in theory that's what it does). If it hasn't succeeded completely, we can keep working to refine it. Starting over from scratch... if FRBR/RDA couldn't pull it off, what would make anyone think starting over from scratch they could have any better luck? Giving up on the attempt altogether as infeasible -- would basically doom us to MARC forever. It very well -may- be infeasible, but that would just doom us to MARC forever -- but not really forever, it will just doom us to basically ceasing to existing as a professional metadata
Re: [RDA-L] Recording Relationships in MARC
Yup, looks like AACR2 to me too. Is there a lesson to be drawn? ;-) ;-) ;-) Just a thought. John From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Gene Fieg Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 11:54 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Recording Relationships in MARC Geez, this looks like AACR2 to me. Looks ok. Make added entry for the journal and its exact issue number. On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Christopher Case cca...@gmail.commailto:cca...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Folks, I'm in the midst of attempting some in-house RDA cataloging and could use a hand on relationships. Currently I am cataloging a book called Similes in the Nikayas : a classified index. The book is an extract from the Journal of the Pali Text Society for 1906-1907. I'd like to record the relationships to the Nikayas (that is, collections of texts making up the Sutta Pitaka) and the Journal of the Pali Text Society. Here's how I think I should go about it. I've created access points both the Sutta Pitaka and the Journal: 730 0# Tipiṭaka. ǂp Suttapiṭaka. 730 0# Journal of the Pali Text Society. Also, I have added two 500 notes: 500 ## Index to: Tipiṭaka. Suttapiṭaka. 500 ## Contained in: Journal of the Pali Text Society for 1906-1907. Does that make sense? Would that adequately express the relationships? Apologies if this is a daft question. I've been following the progression or RDA, working through the toolkit, and trying to keep up with listserv discussions. Regardless, I've found confirmed what I previously supposed, namely that cataloging according to RDA is a far different thing from reading about cataloging according to RDA. Many thanks for any assistance you can provide. Cheers. -- Christopher Case Content Management Librarian Milton S. Eisenhower Library Johns Hopkins University -- Gene Fieg Cataloger/Serials Librarian Claremont School of Theology gf...@cst.edumailto:gf...@cst.edu
Re: [RDA-L] Confusion between Field of activity and Profession or occupation
Just a thought, but why is it necessary to make this distinction at all? Isn't it just the sort of thing that can get cataloguers a bad name? I really don't mean this cynically, I promise: I'm seriously interested. The implication behind the development of RDA was that it was going to be simpler than AACR2, yes? Yet if anything it seems to be making things ten times more complicated, at least to this cataloging amateur. John John Wagstaff Head, Music Performing Arts Library Interim Head, Slavic and East European Library University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign School of Music 1114 W. Nevada Street Urbana IL61801 Tel. 217-244-4070 e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Robert Maxwell [robert_maxw...@byu.edu] Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 1:01 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Confusion between Field of activity and Profession or occupation We are not a definitive source, but we have come up with a rule of thumb for the BYU test records: field of activity is more of an abstract notion, such as music or classical studies or philately; profession or occupation is the actual thing the person does or is, such as clarinet player or professor or stamp collector. It doesn't have to be their formal job (as in what they get paid for). This is only our own take on it at BYU. I think there is a useful distinction between the two elements so I don't think they should be collapsed into one element (as some have suggested), but clearly some better scope notes are needed, either in RDA itself or by some authoritative body such as PCC or LC in their LCPS. Robert L. Maxwell Head, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Dept. 6728 Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602 (801)422-5568 -Original Message- From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Peter J Rolla Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 11:08 AM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA Subject: [RDA-L] Confusion between Field of activity and Profession or occupation Hello - We are a PCC library that has decided to take part in the informal RDA test, and for the past few weeks have been doing much of our original cataloging work using RDA. We're also a NACO library and have consequently been creating or updating name authority records as part of this work. And we have been struggling with the difference between Field of activity (RDA 9.15, MARC field 372) and Profession or Occupation (RDA 9.15, MARC field 374). We thought we had come up with a rule of thumb to use, that Profession or Occupation was the primary career of the person and that Field of activity were endeavors that the person is engaged in but not necessarily their career. However, we just had LC contact us and instructing us to move the information we had put in the 372 field (fiction writer, musician, composer) into a 374 field. (The authority record in question is n 86007554). Because of our confusion, I thought I'd appeal to the members of this list to see if anyone can help us clarify. Are other testing libraries (formal or informal) trying to fill in these fields? Are there additional guidelines for the use of these fields that we've missed? Can anyone explain the distinction between the two fields better than we've been able to? Thanks a lot for your time, Peter - Cataloging Librarian Cataloging Metadata Services Norlin Library, University Libraries 184 UCB, 1720 Pleasant St. University of Colorado at Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0184 303/492-6102
