Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
I think the definitions of three-dimensional form and tactile three-dimensional form in RDA are not very helpful and don't give people any useful guidance as to how to choose which one(s) to apply. Three-Dimensional Form Content expressed through a form or forms intended to be perceived visually in three dimensions. Includes sculptures, models, naturally occurring objects and specimens, holograms, etc. For cartographic content intended to be perceived as a three-dimensional form, Cartographic Three-Dimensional Form For three-dimensional forms intended to be perceived through touch, Tactile Three-Dimensional Form Tactile Three-Dimensional Form Content expressed through a form or forms intended to be perceived through touch as a three-dimensional form or forms. [they seem to have left off the x-ref to cartographic tactile 3-d form, which might be useful] Why are sculptures, models, etc. defined as intended to be perceived visually as if that were mutually exclusive with touch? Except for holograms (which IMO is an image not a form. I don't even think it should be in this list but rather in some sort of three-dimensional still image category along with something that came up during the RDA test and described as a book that consists chiefly of photographs meant to be viewed through 3D glasses (a pair is included with the book), producing a sort of holographic or 3D view of the objects (wood carvings)), it is possible to think of situations in which users would benefit from touching any of the objects given as examples. A great many 3-d educational objects are useless without the tactile aspect and maybe many museums won't let you touch their sculptures, but that doesn't mean there isn't an important tactile aspect. If you look at the other tactile... content types, they seem to be mainly applied to content that is capable of and intended to be used exclusively through touch. You can see this especially in the cartographic 3-d, noted music and text definitions. Cartographic Tactile Image: Cartographic content expressed through line, shape, and/or other forms, intended to be perceived through touch as a still image in two dimensions. Cartographic Tactile Three-Dimensional Form: Cartographic content expressed through a form or forms intended to be perceived through touch as a three-dimensional form or forms. [the average globe tries to represent the contours of the land or water and has a tactile aspect, but cartographic tactile image seems to be intended only for those three-dimensional forms that are useful to people using only touch] Tactile Image: Content expressed through line, shape, and/or other forms, intended to be perceived through touch as a still image in two dimensions. Tactile Notated Movement: Content expressed through a form of notation for movement intended to be perceived through touch. Tactile Notated Music: Content expressed through a form of musical notation intended to be perceived through touch. Includes braille music and other tactile forms of musical notation. Tactile Text: Content expressed through a form of notation for language intended to be perceived through touch. Includes braille text and other tactile forms of language notation. RDA doesn't make this explicit, but I wonder if the intent behind the tactile qualifier is to enable users to identify materials that are accessible to people who are blind or have visual disabilities. (I sometimes wonder if these content types might not make more sense as base types + modifiers, such as cartographic + tactile + [2-d] image or cartographic + image or tactile + image) So a tactile 3-dimensional form would be something like a Braille ruler or slate or an accessible version of game like Monopoly. However, given that RDA's intent is unclear (at least to me), those are just my speculations. Kelley
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
Well, they come in several flavors, so you might have to do more than one.
(Does RDA support flavors?)
Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of A. P. Laubheimer
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:00 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
I can think of an item offhand that would be a tactile three-dimensional
form, though I certainly agree that the phrasing is problematic at best. A
recent musical recording by the band The Flaming Lips was issued as .mp3 files
stored on a USB drive embedded in a seven-pound edible gummy skull. Yes, it's
a fringe item, but total flexibility in regards to the representation of
resources and their various manifestations seems to be a large part of the goal
of RDA, at least in spirit. It seems wise to future-proof a metadata standard
by being as format-agnostic as possible, in my mind anyway. On the other hand,
how many gummy skulls is anyone likely to catalog?
--
A. P. Laubheimer
On Sunday, November 13, 2011 at 8:03 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Sunday afternoon I was at a delightful concert of 18th century French
music. During one legato movement, I admit my mind wondered (as it
sometimes does) to what the RDA media content term tactile
three-dimensional form might apply. A baton? The only answer which
has been suggested to me (offlist) is a dildo. (The more provocative
messages I receive are offlist.)
There has never been one of those for SLC to catalogue, but if there
were, wouldn't model be a more intuitive term? Single intelligible
words work better for me than difficult to comprehend, too long for
display, phrases.
For display purposes, SLC plans to reduce long phrases to one word,
e.g., cartographic. and form. But map, globe, model, and
object seem better choices to me.
The same applies to relationship terms, e.g., using director for the
various phrases containing that word. It is obvious from other data
in the record what has been directed.
Among RDA terms, second only to those phrases in being objectionable,
is calling electronic media computer.
The calm mood induced by the music did not last long!
Stewingly yours, Mac
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.camailto:m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
I have also cataloged educational cards that have the scratch-n-sniff
feature. Yes, if we are going to have tactile, we might as well also have
the sense of smell.
Getting back to the pig lungs, they smelled REALLY bad. The intention was
not to smell them, however. But they were very stinky. I don't think
anything ever got cataloged quite so quickly as those pig lungs, just to
get them off my desk and out of technical services.
Julie
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:57 AM, Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.eduwrote:
Well, they come in several flavors, so you might have to do more than one.
(Does RDA support flavors?)
** **
** **
Benjamin Abrahamse
Cataloging Coordinator
Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems
MIT Libraries
617-253-7137
** **
*From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] *On Behalf Of *A. P. Laubheimer
*Sent:* Sunday, November 13, 2011 9:00 PM
*To:* RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
*Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
** **
I can think of an item offhand that would be a tactile three-dimensional
form, though I certainly agree that the phrasing is problematic at best.
A recent musical recording by the band The Flaming Lips was issued as .mp3
files stored on a USB drive embedded in a seven-pound edible gummy skull.
Yes, it's a fringe item, but total flexibility in regards to the
representation of resources and their various manifestations seems to be a
large part of the goal of RDA, at least in spirit. It seems wise to
future-proof a metadata standard by being as format-agnostic as possible,
in my mind anyway. On the other hand, how many gummy skulls is anyone
likely to catalog?
** **
--
A. P. Laubheimer
On Sunday, November 13, 2011 at 8:03 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Sunday afternoon I was at a delightful concert of 18th century French
music. During one legato movement, I admit my mind wondered (as it
sometimes does) to what the RDA media content term tactile
three-dimensional form might apply. A baton? The only answer which
has been suggested to me (offlist) is a dildo. (The more provocative
messages I receive are offlist.)
** **
There has never been one of those for SLC to catalogue, but if there
were, wouldn't model be a more intuitive term? Single intelligible
words work better for me than difficult to comprehend, too long for
display, phrases.
** **
For display purposes, SLC plans to reduce long phrases to one word,
e.g., cartographic. and form. But map, globe, model, and
object seem better choices to me.
** **
The same applies to relationship terms, e.g., using director for the
various phrases containing that word. It is obvious from other data
in the record what has been directed.
** **
Among RDA terms, second only to those phrases in being objectionable,
is calling electronic media computer.
** **
The calm mood induced by the music did not last long!
** **
Stewingly yours, Mac
** **
** **
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
** **
--
Julie Renee Moore
Catalog Librarian
California State University, Fresno
julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com
559-278-5813
In the end only kindness matters. -- Jewel
[RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
Sunday afternoon I was at a delightful concert of 18th century French
music. During one legato movement, I admit my mind wondered (as it
sometimes does) to what the RDA media content term tactile
three-dimensional form might apply. A baton? The only answer which
has been suggested to me (offlist) is a dildo. (The more provocative
messages I receive are offlist.)
There has never been one of those for SLC to catalogue, but if there
were, wouldn't model be a more intuitive term? Single intelligible
words work better for me than difficult to comprehend, too long for
display, phrases.
For display purposes, SLC plans to reduce long phrases to one word,
e.g., cartographic. and form. But map, globe, model, and
object seem better choices to me.
The same applies to relationship terms, e.g., using director for the
various phrases containing that word. It is obvious from other data
in the record what has been directed.
Among RDA terms, second only to those phrases in being objectionable,
is calling electronic media computer.
The calm mood induced by the music did not last long!
Stewingly yours, Mac
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
I can think of an item offhand that would be a tactile three-dimensional
form, though I certainly agree that the phrasing is problematic at best. A
recent musical recording by the band The Flaming Lips was issued as .mp3 files
stored on a USB drive embedded in a seven-pound edible gummy skull. Yes, it's
a fringe item, but total flexibility in regards to the representation of
resources and their various manifestations seems to be a large part of the goal
of RDA, at least in spirit. It seems wise to future-proof a metadata standard
by being as format-agnostic as possible, in my mind anyway. On the other hand,
how many gummy skulls is anyone likely to catalog?
--
A. P. Laubheimer
On Sunday, November 13, 2011 at 8:03 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Sunday afternoon I was at a delightful concert of 18th century French
music. During one legato movement, I admit my mind wondered (as it
sometimes does) to what the RDA media content term tactile
three-dimensional form might apply. A baton? The only answer which
has been suggested to me (offlist) is a dildo. (The more provocative
messages I receive are offlist.)
There has never been one of those for SLC to catalogue, but if there
were, wouldn't model be a more intuitive term? Single intelligible
words work better for me than difficult to comprehend, too long for
display, phrases.
For display purposes, SLC plans to reduce long phrases to one word,
e.g., cartographic. and form. But map, globe, model, and
object seem better choices to me.
The same applies to relationship terms, e.g., using director for the
various phrases containing that word. It is obvious from other data
in the record what has been directed.
Among RDA terms, second only to those phrases in being objectionable,
is calling electronic media computer.
The calm mood induced by the music did not last long!
Stewingly yours, Mac
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca (mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca))
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
Mac, you are not alone in your stewing! From OLAC-L, last week I posted that I was cataloging something called Wasted Away Display. (My apologies for the repetitive nature of this posting.) It is supposed to give people a graphic representation of how getting wasted can make people look, well, bad! Included: 1 mannequin with t-shirt 1 mannequin head (with a face on each side -- one wasted and one not! (Is this a tête-bêche?!) 1 wig 3 wig pins My initial question was the old GMD question … is it a [kit] or a [model]? After numerous off-list jokes about 2-faced people, the tête-bêche comment, and etc., I ended up choosing [model]. As with so many discussions today, we then turned to what Wasted Away will look like in RDA. As much as I dither over which GMD to choose in AACR2, I remain unconvinced that the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and succinctly convey to users what the thing is that they should expect in our catalogs. So in AACR2, I will have: 245 00 Wasted away display ǂh [model]. 300 1 2-sided model (2 pieces) : ǂb plastic, col. ; ǂc 74 x 42 x 22 cm. (assembled) + ǂe 1 information tent. 520 2-sided mannequin (female torso with t-shirt and 2-sided removable head) with a wasted side and a non-wasted side. Depicts the physical effects of the party lifestyle (a life filled with late nights, cigarette smoke, alcohol, and high-fat foods). Mounted on a base. In RDA, I am assuming that we will have something like this: 245 00 Wasted away display. 300 1 2-sided model (2 pieces) : ǂb plastic, col. ; ǂc 74 x 42 x 22 cm. (assembled) + ǂe 1 information tent. 336 three-dimensional form ǂ2 rdacontent -or- 336 tactile three-dimensional form ǂ2 rdacontent [depending on whether or not you want to encourage the tactile aspects of the said mannequin] 337 unmediated ǂ2 rdamedia 338 object ǂ2 rdacarrier 520 2-sided mannequin (female torso with t-shirt and 2-sided removable head) with a wasted side and a non-wasted side. Depicts the physical effects of the party lifestyle (a life filled with late nights, cigarette smoke, alcohol, and high-fat foods). Mounted on a base. This is how I envision this thing cataloged in RDA, anyway. Is it just me? Do the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and succinctly convey to users the Wasted Away mannequin that is being represented in the record? Is it immediately distinguished from, say, a book? In RDA, is it just as clear that it is a model than what we currently have as the 245 $h [GMD]? -- especially given how these things display in our local catalogs. In my opinion, the clarity is not there. I know that the 336-338 were never intended be displayed in our catalogs. Instead, we are expected to hope that our vendors will make the 336, 337, and 338 into some sort of intelligible icon that the patron will instantly know what that means. I ask you what kind of icon will accurately represent Wasted Away? (The icon that I currently get with my III system is something that looks like a crystal ball ... which perhaps is apropos ... it tells the user nothing.) To sum up, while I do get frustrated to the point of giddiness with our AACR2 GMDs, I am not holding my breath on RDA to resolve this issue of muddiness for our most special formats. And finally getting around to Mac’s point, it is unclear to me when we call it tactile or not in the 336. I questioned this when I cataloged a pig's lung and used it as an RDA example as well. That particular situation was used to demonstrate what human lungs looked like when they had been subjected to smoking. In that case, there was actually a cancerous tumor, as I recall. The ad showed the child with his finger on the tumor, so I decided that it should, indeed, be considered textile. But who is to say when it's textile and when it is not? 336 tactile three-dimensional form ǂ2 rdacontent 336three-dimensional form ǂ2 rdacontent Julie Moore On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 5:03 PM, J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote: Sunday afternoon I was at a delightful concert of 18th century French music. During one legato movement, I admit my mind wondered (as it sometimes does) to what the RDA media content term tactile three-dimensional form might apply. Julie Renee Moore Catalog Librarian California State University, Fresno julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com 559-278-5813 In the end only kindness matters. -- Jewel
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
Julie Moore, cataloguer of everything, said:
Mac, you are not alone in your stewing!
I took out the line which said I'll bet not even Julie has had a dildo
to catalogue.
It is supposed to give people a graphic representation of how getting
wasted can make people look, well, bad! ... I ended up choosing [model].
While it had a model in it, there are enough pieces of various sorts I
would of course have called it a [kit]. Model seems too static a term
for a resource with pieces to manipulate.
As much as I dither over which GMD to choose in AACR2, I remain
unconvinced that the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and
succinctly convey to users what the thing is that they should expect
...
I agree that RDA offers no terms which would convey meaning to a
patron for this resource. RDA doesn't even have kit.
300 1 2-sided model (2 pieces) :$b plastic, col. ; $c 74 x 42 x
22 cm. (assembled) + $e 1 information tent.
I suspect we would have gone with 300 $a1 kit (various pieces) ;$cin
box 74 x 42 x 22 cm., and included your collation information in the
520 summary, using curves after each item, or in a 505 contents.
In RDA, I am assuming that we will have something like this: ...
336 three-dimensional form $2 rdacontent
-or-
336 tactile three-dimensional form $2 rdacontent
337 unmediated $2 rdamedia
338 object $2 rdacarrier
Terms in 336 are repeatable, either in repeating $a or in repeating
336's. There is no provision for plural, however. You have more than
one form. Should the same term be repeated X times, including once
for the wig, and twice for the 2 pins?
You don't mention the wig and pins in either AACR2 or RDA, which would
be easier to do with (various pieces) and a 505 or 520, without over
complicating the 300 it seems to me.
Do the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and succinctly
convey to users the Wasted Away mannequin that is being represented
in the record?
No. They express nothing more succinctly.
And finally getting around to Ma' point, it is unclear to me when we
call it tactile or not in the 336.
I assume a tactile three-dimensional form is a model one is supposed
to feel. It seems to me calling at a model, and saying in 520 that
it is to be felt, works better. Media terms should be *one* word
drawn from common usage.
We have media terms for sight, touch, and hearing. What about smell
and taste? :-{)}
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Tactile three-dimensional form
Mac,
You are too funny!
I know, you are very predictable in your choice of a kit for a box of
stuff. In my final bib record, I did actually mention the wig and pins in a
note. I didn't duplicate the entire bib record here. I prefer the GMD model
because this is a representation of a person (and a situation).
My point was regarding the 336, 337, 338 as the replacement for the GMD
as well as the issue about whether or not really any 3D thing is
tactile.
Julie
PS In answer to your first query ... not yet -- but I have come to work
with stranger things on my desk to catalog! ;-)
On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 7:59 PM, J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca wrote:
Julie Moore, cataloguer of everything, said:
Mac, you are not alone in your stewing!
I took out the line which said I'll bet not even Julie has had a dildo
to catalogue.
It is supposed to give people a graphic representation of how getting
wasted can make people look, well, bad! ... I ended up choosing
[model].
While it had a model in it, there are enough pieces of various sorts I
would of course have called it a [kit]. Model seems too static a term
for a resource with pieces to manipulate.
As much as I dither over which GMD to choose in AACR2, I remain
unconvinced that the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and
succinctly convey to users what the thing is that they should expect
...
I agree that RDA offers no terms which would convey meaning to a
patron for this resource. RDA doesn't even have kit.
300 1 2-sided model (2 pieces) :$b plastic, col. ; $c 74 x 42 x
22 cm. (assembled) + $e 1 information tent.
I suspect we would have gone with 300 $a1 kit (various pieces) ;$cin
box 74 x 42 x 22 cm., and included your collation information in the
520 summary, using curves after each item, or in a 505 contents.
In RDA, I am assuming that we will have something like this: ...
336 three-dimensional form $2 rdacontent
-or-
336 tactile three-dimensional form $2 rdacontent
337 unmediated $2 rdamedia
338 object $2 rdacarrier
Terms in 336 are repeatable, either in repeating $a or in repeating
336's. There is no provision for plural, however. You have more than
one form. Should the same term be repeated X times, including once
for the wig, and twice for the 2 pins?
You don't mention the wig and pins in either AACR2 or RDA, which would
be easier to do with (various pieces) and a 505 or 520, without over
complicating the 300 it seems to me.
Do the 336, 337, and 338 fields more accurately and succinctly
convey to users the Wasted Away mannequin that is being represented
in the record?
No. They express nothing more succinctly.
And finally getting around to Ma' point, it is unclear to me when we
call it tactile or not in the 336.
I assume a tactile three-dimensional form is a model one is supposed
to feel. It seems to me calling at a model, and saying in 520 that
it is to be felt, works better. Media terms should be *one* word
drawn from common usage.
We have media terms for sight, touch, and hearing. What about smell
and taste? :-{)}
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing
HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/http://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
--
Julie Renee Moore
Catalog Librarian
California State University, Fresno
julie.renee.mo...@gmail.com
559-278-5813
In the end only kindness matters. -- Jewel
