Provider-Neutral Records

Provider-Neutral Records and
Cataloging of e-Books
Università degli Studi di Firenze
March 24, 2011
with revisions to April 8, 2011
George Prager
Head of Cataloging, New York University Law School
[email protected]
• 1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• 2. Provider-Neutral Records for Online
Integrating Resources
• 3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph Records
• 4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• 5. Provider-Neutral Records and RDA
• 6. Further Resources
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• Proliferation of remote-access manifestations of serials,
essentially identical in content
• AACR2 and CONSER* policy called for separate records
for each aggregator version
– Multiple document formats
– Multiple aggregator versions (aggregator is a term for
all types of publishers or digitizers of remote-access
Examples of serial aggregators: EbscoHost, HeinOnline,
ABI/Inform, JSTOR, Project Muse
*CONSER is an international cooperative serials cataloging program that is the
serials component of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), under the
aegis of the Library of Congress
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• Resulting parallel proliferation of serial records
for duplicative online versions of same serial
– Difficulty and frustration in searching and
finding records for e-serials in OCLC, other
networks, and OPACs, for copy cataloging
and other uses
– Increasing amounts of local editing needed for
provider-specific records
– Difficulty of maintaining records locally and in
shared databases
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• First proposed by CONSER in May 2002 as the
“Aggregator-Neutral Record”*: One bibliographic
record that represents all essentially identical
versions (or iterations) of the same online
resource, as long as the content of a particular
e-journal does not differ so much that it
represents a separate work
• No cataloging distinction is made between digital
serial reproductions and simultaneous versions
(not worth the time/effort required)
*In this presentation, I will use the phrase “Provider-Neutral records” or “P-N
records” rather than “Aggregator-Neutral records.”
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• Information specific to one provider should NOT
be added to master record in OCLC, such as
package name (JSTOR, HeinOnline, most
headings with the phrase “Online service”)
• Policy applies to all e-journals, but does not
apply to titles in article-based databases*
• Libraries can still follow the single-record
approach for print and online versions
*”Article-based databases” are actually integrating resources, not serials
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• P-N serials policy implemented in July 2003
• OCLC deleted most provider-specific serial records from
WorldCat in 2003
• CONSER catalogers and others can report any
remaining provider-specific records for deletion
• Libraries may do what they wish locally:
– Create or add provider-specific or provider-neutral serial records
in their OPACs themselves
– Use a vendor service like Serials Solutions to add providerneutral serial records to their OPACs*
For an example of how a vendor service can work, see NYU Law School Library’s
local record for the Harvard law review (Online):
1. Provider-Neutral Serial Records
• Further information: CONSER Cataloging
Manual Module 31, Remote Access
Electronic Serials, 2007 draft update
available online at:
2. Provider-Neutral Records for
Remote-Access Electronic Integrating
• Similar problem existed for a relatively small group of eIRs, chiefly searchable, updating bibliographic resources
such as subject oriented databases (AGRICOLA, Art
Index, Medline, Sociological abstracts, etc.), available
from multiple providers
• Definition of “Remote-access electronic integrating
resource”: a continuing resource (no predetermined
conclusion) issued electronically via the Internet that is
continued and revised via updates that do not remain
discrete and separate, but which are incorporated into
the resource” (from p. 2 of PCC report cited in Further
2. Provider-Neutral Records for
Remote-Access Electronic Integrating
• Final report issued by a PCC task force in
October 2007 and policy adopted by PCC
shortly thereafter (report available at:
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Parallel to the increasing proliferation of multiple
electronic aggregators for the same serial, many
monographs have also become available online
through more than one digitizer
• Pre-existing LC/OCLC/PCC policy required the
creation of a new record each time a new
publisher, distributor, or aggregator provided
access to the same online resource
Provider-Neutral E-Monograph Records
• Two approaches were used:
– AACR2 1.11A: Bibliographic record describing reproduction, with
data relating to the original in the note area (usually MARC 21
field 534). National Archives and Libraries Canada follows this
– LCRI 1.11A: Most American libraries followed this policy,
describing the original resource in the body of the record, and
adding details relating to the reproduction in a MARC field 533**
In both of these separate record approaches, a MARC
21 field 776 linking entry was often made to the record
for the non-electronic version (usually the print version)
*For examples of this approach, search in OCLC for the corporate phrase “Documenting
the American South Project” (best to qualify by dates, almost 2000 records)
** For examples of this approach, search OCLC for the almost 2600 records in OCLC for
the exact series phrase “LLMC-digital series”, qualified by date)
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Multiple providers were offering more and more subjectspecific record sets for e-books, often with considerable
overlap among them
• Many almost identical records for the same resource
were appearing in shared bibliographic utilities and
online catalogs
• Similar problems as with provider-specific records for the
same serial
• One example from NYU Law’s catalog: A treatise on American
military laws, and the practice of courts martial, by John O’Brien, an
1846 monograph available through at least 3 digitizers, records at:
There are nine records in OCLC for essentially identical digitized versions of this 1846 monograph
(includes some duplicates from the same digitizer)
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Provider-Neutral Task Group formed in summer
2008 by the Program for Cooperative Cataloging
• Charged to develop a model for a single
bibliographic record to be used for all instances
of an online monograph
• Policy similar to older PCC Provider-Neutral
policies already in effect for serials and
integrating resources (databases)
• New policy went into effect August 1, 2009
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Policy applies to all PCC member libraries
coding their records as PCC program records
whenever they create or revise master records
• Guidelines were written for all online
monographs, but temporarily being applied only
to online books and manuscripts
• Guidelines are in the process of being expanded
to cover other types of online monographs
(eAudio, etc.)*
*The changes will be relatively minor. The guide will be revised to sound less
“book-centric”, and examples will be added to the 300 field for non-textual
online monographs
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Recommended, but not required that non-PCC
member libraries follow the P-N guidelines for
master records in OCLC
• Provider-specific records for online monographs
created or uploaded to OCLC will however be
“neutralized” by OCLC according to P-N
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Policy does not apply to the “Single-record
approach” or to local OPACS
• Catalogers may:
– Add a URL to print record in WorldCat, if one exists
– Create an e-book record, if no other record for the
same online resource exists
– Add URL to print record AND create record for online
e-book, if none exists
• Reminder: Libraries may do whatever they want in their
local OPACS!
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
Provider-Neutral E-Monograph MARC Record
Guide (last updated Sept. 15, 2010):
Includes Metadata application profile, Frequently
asked questions, examples of PN records, and a
Provider-Neutral Record Comparison Chart
General principles from the Guide:
• P-N model makes no distinction between
records for online versions of monographic titles
that are simultaneously issued in print and
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
online, digital reproductions of print resources,
and born-digital resources (these distinctions are
getting increasingly hard to make)
• All online monographic sources cataloged on
OCLC should follow the P-N model from Day
One, even if the resource is available from only
one provider at the time of cataloging
• P-N record emphasizes recording only
information applicable to all manifestations with
the same content
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• P-N record should not contain information specific to any
one particular provider*
• Provider or package names are not given in notes or as
added entries, or added to uniform titles as qualifiers
• Notes about access restrictions, file formats, or system
requirements specific to particular providers are also not
used on the master record
• Basis of description:
– If the resource exists only in an online version, the description
should be based upon the resource itself, preferably on formally
presented evidence. If the necessary information is not available
from the resource itself, then follow the order of sources for that
situation given in AACR 9.0B.
*with the exception of citing the package and format upon which the record has been based in the “Source of title”
Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Basis of description (cont.):
– If the resource also exists in print, microform, etc.,
then the description may be based either upon the
online version, or upon the print or other related
version record. Increasingly, record sets are being
created for online reproductions of print (microform,
etc. versions), through use of macros or other
automated techniques, without actual examination of
the online resource by a cataloger. The appropriate
5XX notes to use in either case are discussed on
slides 29 and 31-33.
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
Highlights from the P-N Metadata Application
Profile (following MARC 21 order):
• Fixed-length data elements—additional
material characteristics (006)
– Only the first byte is mandatory for OCLC
records. Use 006/00 “Form of material” code
“m” (Computer file/electronic resource)
• Physical description fixed field (007)
– First two bytes are mandatory, use 007/00 “c”
(Electronic resource) and 007/01 “r” (Remote)
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• 008 Fixed-length data elements—general
• Code as for any online monograph
– 008/23 Form of item. Use code “o”
• *The P-N Task Force realized early that MARC 21 didn’t clearly
distinguish online from direct access resources. Our group
submitted a MARBI discussion paper and proposal to add the values
“q” for “direct electronic” (such as CD-ROMs), and “o” for “online” to
008/23 “Form of item”, and to make obsolete the older value “s”,
“electronic”. See Discussion paper 2009-DP04 and Proposal 201001, available from the MARC Development Web site at
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• More on 008/23 Form of item:
– New codes “o” and “q” relate to the format of the
resource as issued, not to how the resource may be
adopted at the local, regional, or consortial level
– Codes apply to main resource described
– Codes do not apply to accompanying material
– Codes do not apply to single-record approach*
*That is, a record for the direct access print, microform, etc., version of the resource
with an 856 link to the online version should NOT use code 008/23 “o”
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
– PCC implemented new codes on June 1, 2010
– Pre-existing broader code “s”, “electronic”, still valid
on records not coded as “pcc”, and may be used
locally as well
– However, OCLC is converting code “s” to “o” or “q” on
a retrospective and continuing basis
– New code “o” complements 007/00-01 coded
information as well as textual information in 300 $a “1
online resource”, in better marking records for online
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• LC control number (010)
– Do not include print LCCN here, but move it to 776 $w instead
• ISBN (020)
Record each e-ISBN in a separate 020 $a
Record other ISBNs in 020 $z
Copy the print ISBN, if any, to 776 $z
If unclear which format the ISBN represents, use $z
• Classification numbers (050/060/082/086)
– Use of major classification strongly encouraged but not required
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
General Material Designation (245 $h): Add: “electronic
Variant titles (246): retain from source record and add
provider-specific title variants if important (but don’t
specify) name of provider, i.e.:
246 1# $a Available from some providers with title: $a
or simply: 246 1# $a <title>
Edition statement (250): record only edition statements
originating from the original publisher/society; ignore
statements that pertain to specific provider versions
Imprint statement (260): record first named publication
information that applies to all known instances of the
online resource (not the name of a commercial digitizer)
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
MARC Record Guide
• Physical description (300) Use “1 online resource” in
$a. If available, include pagination in parentheses
followed by illustrative matter, e.g.; $a 1 online resource
(25 p.) : $b col. ill.*
– If copy cataloging, or deriving the record for the online version
from a print, microform, etc., record, the pagination may be taken
from the related record. (See “Basis of description” on slides 2021).
– Exclude any original statement of dimensions from $c
*When the P-N provider-neutral standards are adopted for non-textual
online monographs, the statement of the extent in 300 $a will be
appropriate for the content: for an online resource of 6 maps: 1 online
resource (6 maps)
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Series statement (490). Record as it applies to
all known instances of the online resource.
– Record e-ISSN if any
(Remember, 440 field is obsolete)
• Source of title (500). Use as first note, but do
not use if “Description based on/print other
format version record” (DBO) note is present
• Restrictions on access (506). Use only for DLF
Registry of Digital Masters and similar projects
• Additional physical format (530). Generally
prefer use of $i in the 776 field
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Electronic reproduction (533)
– Use only for records for DLF Registry of Digital
Masters and other digital preservation projects. Use
with $5, giving the MARC 21 code for the institution
adding the information
• System details and Mode of access notes (538)
– Use System details note only for DLF Registry and
similar records with $5
– Make a Mode of access note only if resource is
accessed by means other than the WWW
• Action note (583). Use only for DLF and similar records,
with $5*
*This note usually relates to preservation actions:
583 1# $a will microfilm $c 2012 $2 pda $5 NNU-L
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Source of description note (588)*
– Contains administrative information about the record,
such as Source of description, Latest issue consulted
(for serials), or other non-public cataloger’s notes
588 ## $a Description based on print version record.
588 ## $a Description based on microfilm version record.
*One of the newer MARC fields. See MARC Proposal 2009-07 and earlier
Discussion paper 2009-DP02 for background.
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
– Also use field 588 for notes combining Source
of description with Source of title:
588 ## $a Description based on: Vol. 2; title
from PDF caption (publisher’s Web site,
viewed July 4, 2010).
But: LC/PCC will continue to use 500 field for
simple Source of title notes:
500 ## $a Title from PDF t.p. (publisher’s Web
site, viewed July 4, 2010).
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
– PCC implemented 588 field on June 1, 2010
– OCLC database project to convert appropriate
500 fields to 588 fields
– Further information on 588 field on CONSER
• 588 Draft instructions and examples
• Webinar recording
• PowerPoint presentation
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Added entry (700/710/711/730)
– Use if applicable to all known instances of the
online resource. Do not use for
package/provider names (DLF records
• Other format (776)
Often used in conjunction with a 588 note. Use
776 $i rather than 530 to describe type of
resource recorded in 776 field
776 08 $i Print version
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
Series added entry (800/810/811/830)
• Use the authorized print form of the heading when providing an
access point for a series that exists both print and online
• Use the authorized form of the online series, for series that exist
only online
• Do not add the qualifer (Online) to any series access point*
• Do not use for package/provider series (DLF Registry exception with
• Use the print ISSN rather than online ISSN for series that exist in
print as well as online*
• *The purpose of this policy is to collocate series added entries for
the same series, regardless of format. For a detailed explanation of
the new series policy, see FAQ 8 in the Provider-Neutral EMonograph MARC Record Guide.
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Electronic location and access (856)
– Use $u for URIs that are general, NOT
institution specific
– Likewise, do not use $z for information that is
institution specific
– Use $3 for provider-name, if URI doesn’t
clearly indicate the name of the provider
– $3 may also be used to indicate which parts
of the resource are available digitally, if only
part/s of the resource have been digitized
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Copy Cataloging and the P-N Record:
– Multiple records: select the P-N record, if
– No P-N record exists: use the record that
matches best. Do not add a duplicate record!
• But; if content of digital manifestation is
significantly different (matter of “cataloger’s
judgment”, or lack thereof) from resource/s
represented on pre-existing records, create a
new record
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
Provider-specific e-book records in OCLC:
• Duplicate e-book records being merged in
OCLC through automation, record set by record
• Records in process of automated merging often
have note:
“eContent provider-neutral record in process”
• Duplicate e-book records also being reported by
catalogers to OCLC for manual deletion
• Newly created duplicate records will also be
deleted by OCLC
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• Recommendations for Best Use of P-N
Records in Libraries:
– Not really the focus of the P-N guide
– New task force needed to develop some
recommended practices, or options
– Libraries can use a single P-N record that
contains all specific package and other local
information on 1 record, or they can use
multiple records, each with one specific
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
package URI
– If using one P-N record, they may still wish to add
provider-specific added entries
– Database maintenance:
• Library may wish to have their database de-duped, to merge
all provider-specific records for the same resources
• Need for vendors to follow the P-N model for new record
sets, and hopefully offer all of their record sets (new, old, and
ongoing), as P-N records
• Need for monographic counterpart of Serials Solutions (good
business opportunity!)
– Reminder: Libraries still need to follow P-N guidelines
when coding master records in OCLC as PCC
Program records
3. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
• P-N Sample Records:
Ten sample P-N records were added to OCLC,
and are updated as needed.
Access records by searching: ut: Provider
neutral task force (PCC) example records*
*Currently, only 7 records are retrieved via that search
4. Vendor Records and Record Guide
• Guide for vendors creating e-book records:
MARC Record Guide for Monograph Aggregator
Vendors first published online in 2006 by PCC
• New edition needed because of new P-N emonograph policy instituted in 2009
• 2nd ed. published in October 2009
• Periodically revised, at the same time as the P-N
E-Monograph Guide
• Available on PCC website under “Vendor
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
MARC Record Guide for Monograph Aggregator Vendors, 2nd ed.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................ 1
1.1 Rationale for Revision .............................................. 1
1.2 Audience ........................................................ 1
1.3 Purpose.......................................................... 1
1.4 Scope ........................................................... 2
2. Record Categories for E-Monographs ....................................... 2
2.1 Born Digital ...................................................... 2
2.2 New Edition of a Print Publication .................................... 3
2.3 Reproduction of an Existing Publication or Manuscript .................... 3
3. How are MARC Records Created? ......................................... 3
3.1 MARC Records Created Directly in MARC 21 Format .................... 3
3.2 Non-MARC Records Created Using Dublin Core ........................ 3
3.3 Non-MARC Records Created Using MODS, XML, HTML, EXCEL, etc. ..... 4
4. MARC Data Specifications ................................................ 4
5. Tips for Vendors ....................................................... 17
6. Templates ............................................................. 20
6.1 Template for born-digital record...................................... 20
6.2 Template for electronic reproduction ................................. 21
Provider-Neutral Record Metadata Application Profile (MAP) ................. 5
7. Example .............................................................. 23
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Purpose of the guide is “to provide vendors, who
do not usually create records in OCLC, with
information for producing high quality MARC
record sets acceptable to libraries” (p. 1).
• Guide endorses creation of records in Dublin
• Also allows creation of vendor records in MODS,
XML, HTML, EXCEL, etc. that will be compatible
with MARC 21
• Does not provide guidelines for use of Dublin
Core and other non-MARC formats such as the
above, but points to relevant documents
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Major part of guide consists of “Metadata
Application Profile (MAP)”, on p. 5-16
• Differs from P-N Guide in that it lists ALL fields
and subfields that should appear in MARC 21
records; P-N Guide is designed to provide
guidance to catalogers already familiar with
AACR2 and MARC 21 standards for
monographic cataloging
• “Tips for Vendors” includes 17 tips, such as
where to locate LC classification numbers, how
to treat “bound together” titles, etc.
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Guide also includes templates for creating “borndigital” records, and for “electronic reproductions
of print or other format version records (Section
6), as well as a record example (Section 7, last
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Need to publicize MARC Record Guide and to offer
vendors assistance in following guide
• Task Group on Vendor-Supplied Bibliographic
Records was created in 2006 within the American
Association of Law Libraries (AALL)
– Works with vendors
– Publicizes MARC Record Guide
– Offers vendors assistance in following guide and other national
– Reviews vendor MARC record sets
– Offers constructive feedback to vendors on how to improve
record quality
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
– Encourages vendors to make arrangements
with authority control vendors, such as
MARCIVE and LTI, to supply current authority
data for the cataloging produced
– Provides helpful documents to library
community on adding OCLC numbers to
vendor records, quality control through
batchload analysis, etc.
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
– Provides evaluations on record sets to the law
library community
Task Group Evaluation Format
• General information
Name of vendor
Contact information
Records availability
Test records availability
Methodology for record creation
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Task Group Evaluation Format (cont.):
– Evaluation
Review status
Authority control
Fixed fields
Variable length fields
Subject headings/classification
– Additional comments
This slide and the previous one, courtesy of Alan Keely’s presentation given as part
of the Ever-Evolving World of Vendor-Supplied MARC Records (see citation in
last section of presentation
4. Vendor Records and Vendor Guide
• Wiki includes one complete vendor set evaluation
• Most recent and future activities of Task Force
• What to do with duplicate vendor records already in
library databases?
• New MarcEdit software update able to de-dupe records even
if fields lack unique numerical data*
• Information publicly available on Task Group’s wiki
*MarcEdit is a free MARC editing utility developed by Terry Reese; this
update was developed by him working with a VBR Task Member, Yael
Mandelstam in late 2010. More on MarcEdit:
5. Provider-Neutral Records and RDA
• RDA has replaced GMDs (MARC 21 245 $h)
with three new fields: Content (336), Media
(337), and Carrier (338)*
• Textual online resource:
• 245 00 $a Statement of international
cataloguing principles
• 300 ## $a 1 online resource (15 p.)
• 336 ## $a text $2 rdacontent
• 337 ## $a computer $2 rdamedia
• 338 ## $a online resource $2 rdacarrier
*Content and carrier elements are RDA core; Media field is not
5. Provider-Neutral Records and RDA
• RDA’s treatment of reproductions:
• RDA does not seem compatible with the idea of one record for
multiple manifestations, which is the basic premise of P-N records
• RDA bases the description of reproductions on the reproduction, not
the original (RDA 1.11 and specific parts throughout RDA Chapter 2;
similar to AACR2 chapter 11 for microform, but a departure from the
corresponding LCRI)
• RDA requires that the Edition statement and Imprint information be
recorded for the online manifestation (the provider), not the original
publisher (RDA, 2.8.3)
• RDA also records information relating to original print, etc. version (if
any) in areas of the record relating to the related manifestation (RDA
27.1; MARC 534 and 776 field, or both.). LCPS for gives
guidelines for referencing related manifestations, but states that the
guidelines do not apply when the single record or provider neutral
technique is being used
5. Provider-Neutral Records and RDA
• LC was applying RDA as written during the test of RDA
(no RDA-coded P-N records were created records for
serials, integrating resources, or monographs). The full
policy is detailed in a document that was posted to the
LC website on April 29, 2011: Reconsidering the
Cataloging of Reproductions
• What will be done after the test?
• PCC P-N policies have been very successful in “decluttering” national databases and OPACS
• P-N serial record policy since mid 2003; CONSER
catalogers generally seem very much against returning
to provider-specific records
5. Provider-Neutral Records and RDA
• OCLC also prefers the P-N approach, and has
invested much time and energy into eliminating
provider-specific records for online resources
• Likely that PCC will continue to follow P-N
• Other approaches: Should MARC holdings
records be used for each provider-specific
manifestation? (This approach could also be
used for microform and other reproductions)
5. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
Future database scenario:
• Create work and expression level bibliographic
records, and link records for each providerspecific manifestation to the appropriate
expression level record? RDA could work well in
this structure
– Databases should be able to group related
manifestations together, and display them in
an user-friendly manner
6. Further Resources
• Aggregator Neutral Records
• BIBCO Cataloging Standards section of BIBCO Web
page, available at:
• Culbertson, Rebecca. Provider-Neutral Cataloging
(Elluminate session, July 23, 2009)
• Culbertson, Rebecca. Provider-Neutral E-Monograph
MARC Record Guide, 2009- (last updated Sept. 2010)
6. Further Resources
• Dickerson, Gene. Provider-Neutral Records: An
Overview, presented at the AALL Annual
Conference, July 27, 2009; last revised Aug. 12,
6. Further Resources
• Ever-Evolving World of Vendor-Supplied MARC
Records: Review of Task Force Work (AALL Annual
Meeting, July 12, 2010)
• Prager, George. “Treatment of Electronic Monographs”,
Technical Services Law Librarian, v. 31, no. 2 Dec.
2005, p. 11-13
• Recommendation for Provider Neutral Record for
Cataloging Remote Access Electronic Integrating
resources: Report and Recommendations
6. Further Resources
• Reconsidering the Cataloging of Reproductions;
last updated Apr. 29, 2011; available at:
• Task Group on Vendor-Supplied Bibliographic
Records Web page
(American Assoc. of Law Libraries)
• Domande?
• Grazie mille!
Related flashcards


20 cards


28 cards

Digital libraries

62 cards

Create Flashcards