What does RDA mean to
the future of Catalogs:
A Guide for Public
Service Staff and
Librarians
Melissa Brooks – West Virginia University
Oct. 6, 2013
A Little Bit About AACR2
AACR was developed in the 1960s, revised in 1978, with a
final revision in 2002.
AACR2 was last updated in 2005. (7 years ago)
Has two main sections:
1. Description – broken down by chapter for each type of
material
2. Access – for the creation of access points within the
cataloging of the item
A Little Bit About MARC
MARC stands for MAchine Readable Cataloging
MARC was developed in the late 1960s as a way to enable
libraries to share information at a reasonable cost and in a
computer readable format
MARC is a computerized way of recording information
(Metadata)
To hold this Metadata, MARC uses Tag Fields to indicate
placement of the Metadata
Ex. 1xx Tag Field = Main Entry
245 Tag Field = Main Title
250 Tag Field = Edition Statement
The future capabilities of MARC were seen as a success for
libraries so in a later version MARC21 it took on extra facets to
fit the needs of AACR2. Hence why extra Tag Fields are added.
Since AACR2 and MARC have worked for so long,
WHY Change??
They Don’t Work Any
Longer!!!
• The Cataloging Rules have become out of date.
• They don’t work well with new ways to link
metadata.
• Also, AACR2 is written in chapter sequence by
format of the item. It does not allow for new
formats to be added or for combined materials.
Example: Playaways, Electronic Resources, MP3s
or MP4s, and multi-format items.
• Searching has changed. Patrons no longer use a
traditional card catalog. They now use ILS
systems that allow for keyword searching and
some aspects of the semantic web.
SO WHAT’S
NEXT????
FRBR
Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records
It is a conceptual model. (Not a set of Cataloging
Rules) Developed in 1997 by IFLA.
It is meant to help the patron find, identify, select, and
obtain information. (Patron Centric)
FRBR is meant to help analyze information into
Entities, Attributes of the Entity, and Relationships
between Entities.
FRBR Relationships: (GROUP 1)
Work - (What is imagined by the Creator)
is realized through
Expression – (How the work is written)
is embodied in
Manifestation – (The produced work)
is exemplified by
Item – (This is the physical item
on the shelf)
FRBR Relationships: (GROUP 1)
This concept is know by the
Acronym WEMI.
Which can sometimes be
confused with WAMMY.
An Example of FRBR
Work
Is the intellectual
property of the Creator.
Hamlet – As thought up
by William Shakespeare.
Expression
The realization of the work.
Hamlet – written down in
Shakespeare’s hand.
An Example of FRBR
Manifestation
Item
The physical
embodiment of the work!
(Carrier- BOOK)
The copy you find on
your shelf. WVU’s Copy!
FRBR is the start of when
Catalogers and Programmers
begin to really look at linked data
and the future of how catalogs
will be structured.
So How Will This Conceptual Model
Create Structured Metadata?
Introducing…
RDA – Resource Description and Access
• RDA is the new cataloging standard that has been
developed by the Joint Steering Committee for Revision
of AACR2R.
• RDA incorporates the principles of the FRBR conceptual
model.
• RDA is a living web document/standard. It can easily be
updated and modified to meet the changing needs of
Cataloging and Metadata.
• RDA was fully implemented March 31, 2013 by Library of
Congress, OCLC, National Libraries and other libraries
have or are beginning to implement as we speak.
So what is the difference between
AACR2 and RDA – Patron View
Bibliographic Record in AACR2
AACR2 contains
Abbreviations
Use of the c – to
signify copyright
So what is the difference between
AACR2 and RDA – Patron View
Bibliographic Record in AACR2
Records contains a GMD
(General material
designation)
Contains abbreviation
et. al.
So what is the difference between
RDA and AACR2 – Patron View
Bibliographic Record in RDA
Mostly no more use
of abbreviations
Use of the © symbol
instead of c.
Addition of Content,
Media, and Carrier
Types – (MARC 336338 Fields) – Added
to All Records
instead of GMD for
only non-book
formats.
Addition of a Relator
term to Creators
Name
So what is the difference between
RDA and AACR2 – Patron View
Bibliographic Record in RDA
Statements relating to the
publication, printing,
distribution, issue, release, or
production of a work. (MARC
264 no longer a 260)
The information is now
separated to allow for better
use and easier understanding.
So what is the difference between
RDA and AACR2 – Patron View
Bibliographic Record in RDA
Carrier Characteristics
This includes information on:
•
•
•
•
Sound Characteristics
Projection Characteristics of
Movie Image
Video Characteristics
Digital File Characteristics
These are the 344-347
MARC fields
Other Stuff that May be Seen In the Patron
View of an RDA Bibliographic Record
•
Differences in Capitalization - No longer will everything be lower case
except for Proper terms and the beginning of titles.
Ex. AACRC2 – Legendary locals of Huntington West
Virginia / James E. Casto.
RDA – LEGENDARY LOCALS OF HUNTINGTON WEST
VIRGINIA / JAMES E. CASTO.
•
No more abbreviations – RDA still allows for some abbreviations like in.
for inches. – But all the Latin ones are gone. – So bye-bye: et. al. (et
alia), s.n. (sine nomine), or s.l. (sine loco).
•
cm is a symbol and not an abbreviation, so it will not have a period
following unless there is a series title.
•
Relator terms will now be used to the relation of a person to the
particular resource to which they are attributed.
Ex. Brandon Brooks – is the producer of a movie, now you will see
in an Added Author authority tracing that looks like
Added Author: Brandon Brooks, producer.
Other Stuff that May be Seen In the Patron
View of an RDA Bibliographic Record
•
Statement of Responsibility – Take it as you see it. If you see Dr. John
Smith, University of Edinboro on title page then that is what will
appear on Catalog record.
•
Errors in a title will not have [sic] in title. They will now be written
incorrectly and then alternate title will be created.
EX. AACR2 – Pushnig [sic] daisies
Corrected – Pushing daisies
RDA – Pushnig daisies
Corrected – Pushing daisies
•
There will be differences in how the Subject Heading for the Bible will
appear
Ex. AACR2 – Bible. O.T.
RDA – Bible. New Testament
•
“No” more Rule of Three? – This means that many authors can be listed,
we don’t stop at three and they can all be traced for authorities.
Example of Statement of
Responsibility
Name as appears on title
page
Name as appears in
statement of responsibility
Example of “NO” Rule of Three
There are 6 contributors:
Larry Blocher
Eugene Corporon
Ray Cramer
Tim Lautzenheiser
Edward Lisk
Richard Miles
In AACR2 the only Person who would have
been listed is Richard Miles and the rest
would have been et. al.
In RDA they all appear in the Title Entry
and all are traced as Added Authors.
Also notice the use of relator terms added
to each name.
Parallel Titles
AACR2
Parallel Titles are treated in a tier hierarchy – the first
parallel title listed and then any parallel title that is in
English. Titles in other languages are not listed after the
English Parallel Title.
RDA
All Parallel Titles can be listed.
Parallel Titles – AACR2
Parallel Titles are
treated in a tier
hierarchy – the first
parallel title listed and
then any parallel title
that is in English. No
titles in other languages
are listed after the
English Parallel Title.
Parallel Titles – RDA
Title: Män som hatar kvinnor = Los hombres que no
amaban a las mujeres = Girl with the dragon tattoo =
Les hommes qui n'aimaient pas les femmes / Yellow Bird
presenterar ; i samproduktion med ZDF Enterprises,
Sveriges Television, Nordisk Film, ZDF ; och Filmpool
Stockholm Mälardalen, Film i Väst, Spiltan Underhållning
M AB ; producent, Søren Stærmose ; en film av Niels
Arden Oplev ; manus [manuscript], Rasmus Heisterberg,
Nikolaj Arcel ; regi, Niels Arden Oplev.
Other Title: Los hombres que no amaban a las mujeres
Other Title: Girl with the dragon tattoo
Other Title: Les hommes qui n'aimaient pas les femmes
A Little About the Content Type, Media Type,
and Carrier Type (336-338 Fields )
Content Type (336) - The form of communication through
which a work is expressed.
Ex. Notated Music
Spoken Word
Still Image
Text
Two-dimensional Moving Image
A Little About the Content Type, Media Type,
and Carrier Type (336-338 Fields )
Media Type (337) - Media type reflects the general type of
intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc.,
the content of a resource. (Refers to the 007 field
position 00.)
Ex. Computer
Unmediated
Video
A Little About the Content Type, Media Type,
and Carrier Type (336-338 Fields )
Carrier Type (338) - Carrier type reflects the format of the
storage medium and housing of a carrier in combination
with the media type (which indicates the intermediation
device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a
resource).
Ex. Volume
Videodisc
Slide
Audio Disc
A Little About the Content Type, Media Type,
and Carrier Type (336-338 Fields )
The below link will take you Ex.
to a document created by
Cathy Lamoureaux from the
Carnegie Library of
Pittsburgh. In this
document she breaks down
the 336-338 fields into
individual sets to show how
a specific type of item will
be represented in these
fields
https://skydrive.live.com/view.
aspx?resid=7160219E1C1E8
76E!150&app=WordPdf&aut
hkey=!AAyi2x45qmdrqTY
Music CD
336 Performed music
337 Audio
338 Audio disc
DVD
336 Two-dimensional
moving image
337 Video
338 Videodisc
But the Biggest thing about RDA
Bibliographic Records is…
They are to live
peacefully with AACR2
Bibliographic Records
in an ILS.
So what is the future of Metadata
and Catalogs???
Semantic Web
and
BibFrame
Semantic Web
•
The Semantic Web is a new way of looking at the
Internet and how it is pieced together.
•
No longer will we be looking at the web as a flat surface
of one page linking to the next, but as a bunch of
snippets of information that can be pulled together to
create new, flexible, and more versatile structures.
•
The biggest term to remember about the Semantic Web
is a ‘TRIPLE.’ This is a way of connecting information
together to allow for a more natural language approach
to searching. It used principles based on RDF –
Resource Description Framework.
•
You may hear people talking about ‘linked data.’ This is
what they are referring to.
BibFrame
•
Bibframe is standard that is being developed by the
Library of Congress as a replacement to MARC.
•
This standard is looking at using the a ‘Linked Data’
model to better utilize Metadata. (Semantic Web)
•
Currently it is using XML Tagging to create ‘Linked Data’
records.
Questions????
Thank YOU!!!
References, Links, Resources
Brigham Young University, Harold B. Lee Library. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from: http://lib.byu.edu
International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2009, February). Functional requirements for
bibliographic records. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf
James Madison University Libraries. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from http://catalog.lib.jmu.edu/search/X
Lamoureaux, C. (2013, April 13). RDA – Content, media and carrier type values for various types of resources.
Retrieved from
https://skydrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=7160219E1C1E876E!150&app=WordPdf&authkey=!AAyi2x45qmdrqTY
3
Miller, L. (2011). Resource Description and Access (RDA): An introduction for reference librarians. Reference & User
Services Quarterly, 50 216-222. Retrieved from http://rusa.metapress.com/content/u771g5f12313
Morehead State University, Camden-Carroll Library. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from
http://www.moreheadstate.edu/library/
Palmer, S. (2001). The semantic web: An introduction. Retrieved from http://infomesh.net/2001/swintro/
Schiff, Adam. (2011, February 18). AACR2 to RDA. Retrieved from
http://faculty.washington.edu/aschiff/AkLAPresentation-WithNotes.pdf
University of Cincinnati Libraries. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from http://uclid.uc.edu
University of Tennessee Libraries. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from http://www.lib.utk.edu/
U.S. Library of Congress & Zepheira. (n.d.). New bibliographic framework. Retrieved from http://bibframe.org
U.S. Library of Congress. Net work Development and MARC Standards Office. (n.d.). MARC format for bibliographic
data. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ecbdhome.html
West Virginia University. Downtown Library. (n.d.). Catalog. Retrieved from http://www.libraries.wvu.edu/