Showing posts with label AACR2. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AACR2. Show all posts

Friday, April 25, 2014

Corrected Titles Proper & Variant Titles : RDA vs AACR2 : Questions and Answers & Best Practices

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION & ACCESS RDA

Loading...
Loading...


See is infographic in full screen: Corrected Titles Proper & Variant Titles : RDA vs AACR2


See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Friday, December 20, 2013

How Did RDA Come To Be?


AACR3?


In the late 1990’s the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules decided to make changes for the future of AACR. It realized that the changes that give us a new way to look at our environment also give us new opportunities to improve how we deliver bibliographic information to users.

Resource Description and Access


In 2002, work had begun on a revision of AACR2, called AACR3.  However, by April 2005, the plan had changed.  The reactions to an initial draft raised particular concerns about the need to move to closer alignment with the FRBR model and to build an element set. It was clear that we could not continue doing cataloging the way we always had.  We could no longer produce records in MARC format in systems that could not talk to the rest of the information community.

A new plan was developed and the name was changed to Resource Description and Access to emphasize the two important tasks. Importantly, the Anglo-American emphasis was removed.


Collaboration with Other Communities


The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) for the Development of RDA has paid close attention to developments in IFLA as well as in various metadata communities, and initiated collaborations with the publishers’ community who were developing their own metadata set called ONIX.  Together these parties developed controlled vocabularies for media types, content types, and carrier types (called the RDA/ONIX Framework).
 
In 2007, JSC representatives met with key collaborators and agreed to examine the fit between RDA and other metadata models.  Together we have created an initial registry for the RDA elements and controlled terms, available freely on the Web.

In 2008 the JSC started participating in a joint effort to determine what revisions are necessary to accommodate the encoding of RDA in MARC 21. The RDA/MARC Working Group has presented proposals to MARBI (the Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information committee of ALA), many of which have already been approved.

RDA addresses all types of materials collected by libraries, but defers to specialized cataloging manuals for more specific rules needed for some types of materials -- for cultural objects, rare materials, cartographic resources, and more. In some cases, there will be a transition or “bridge” period to move from current practices and formats and systems to the next generation.

A Tool for the Digital World


The Joint Steering Committee stated among the goals for RDA that it was to be a tool designed for the digital world.  This had several implications:
  • RDA was to be a Web-based tool optimized for use as an online product. The result is the RDA Toolkit, which continues to be refined with feedback from users.
  • RDA was to be a tool that addresses cataloging all types of content and media
  • RDA was to be a tool that results in records that are intended for use in the digital environment, through the Internet, Web-OPACs, etc.
  • RDA was intended to result in records with a metadata set of elements intended to be readily adaptable to newly emerging database structures.

 

RDA Specific Goals


Although not all of the stated goals for RDA have yet been reached, but good progress is being made and proposals for improvements are still welcome.  Specifically, RDA rules were to:

  • be easy to use and interpret
  • be applicable to an online, networked environment
  • provide effective bibliographic control for all types of media
  • encourage use beyond the library community
  • be compatible with other similar standards
  • have a logical structure based on internationally agreed-upon principles
  • separate content and carrier data, and separate content from display
  • provide numerous examples, appropriate and relevant to the specific instruction


[Source: Library of Congress]


Saturday, November 23, 2013

Why RDA?

Why RDA?


Let’s first encounter head-on the questions from those who ask:
“Why we don’t just amend AACR2 again, like we used to?”

To address such questions, we need to:
  • Examine the current cataloging environment -- and how it continues to evolve
  • Perceive how Resource Description and Access (RDA) is an improvement over AACR2 as a tool for that environment


The Cataloging Environment


Catalogs are no longer isolated within the walls of an institution. Bibliographic data from any source can now be integrated into the wider Internet environment. New kinds of links can be made, and new displays can be generated for users from data packaged in new ways -- all of it on a global scale in multiple languages and scripts. These can be called ‘linked data systems.’  We now have the technology to provide global connection anywhere that computers can operate.  That includes the digital connections of cell phones or smart phones with Internet connections to link to any user -- any place -- any time.

The information systems and content in the future will be accessible on the Web. The elements that describe our resources will be available to libraries and users everywhere in the world through a Web front-end that connects users to services and data. That data may come from publishers, from creators, from libraries and other institutions … or from anywhere.

Actually, bibliographic data and digital resources are already on the Web, and we’ve started adding the controlled vocabularies from libraries to help identify resources. RDA enables us to identify all the identifying characteristics of all the things we have in our collections, in ways that machines and the Internet can manipulate for more useful displays for users.

Our entire cataloging environment continues to evolve:
  • It is increasingly Web-based.
  • We need to catalog a much wider range of information carriers than we did in the past.
  • We need to deal with many more types of content and complexity of content in the resources that we catalog.
  • Metadata is now created by a wider range of people, who have a wider range of skill levels -- not only by skilled professional catalogers, but by support staff, non-library staff, vendors, wikipedians, and also publishers.  Some of us are using structures other than the MARC format for our records (e.g., using Dublin Core for some digital resources).
And we now have access to descriptive data for resources in digital form – even when the resource is in standard book format, the descriptive data is now available from many publishers using ONIX, which is information we can capture for our bibliographic records.

In the digital world we sometimes find that basic bibliographic description is an integral part of a digital object - the software that helps create the digital object or digitizes an analog object, automatically provides a basic set of metadata, that is attributes or data elements.  Think of how the software for word processing, like Microsoft Word, suggests a name for your document based on the first words you type (ironically the “titles” for early manuscripts were the first line of text, too!)  Or how it can automatically provide the date you created the document. So we can envision the automatic creation of some of the bibliographic information our cataloging systems can capture, saving the cataloger’s time.  RDA builds on this to emphasize transcribing what you see for the basic elements of bibliographic description (‘the representation principle’).

A key aspect of this new “Semantic Web” environment is that it is built on element-based metadata schemas and vocabularies -- and that is exactly what RDA delivers.

The Problems with AACR2


During the 1990’s there were many complaints about how unsatisfactory AACR2 was:
  • “It has become increasingly complex”
  • “There is no logical structure”
  • “It mixes content and carrier data”
  • “Hierarchical and other important relationships are not adequately addressed” 
  • “It reflects an Anglo-American centric viewpoint” 
  • “It pre-dates the FRBR entity-relationship conceptual model”
  • “There is not enough support for the ‘collocation’ function of cataloging”
  • “It did not foresee the Internet or the existence of well-formed metadata or vocubularies”

[Source: Library of Congress]


Saturday, June 8, 2013

Acronyms as variants in RDA NARs

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION & ACCESS RDA

QUESTION:

Would the same rules for qualifying a corporate body apply to both the heading and the variants? For example, would this be appropriate under RDA:
110 2_ Progressive Artists Group (Jaipur, India)
410 2_ PAG (Jaipur, India)
We would never qualified "PAG" under AACR2 when it's used as a variant form. When it's used as a heading, of course, then we would qualify. What about in RDA?

ANSWER:

We had a very specific LCRI practice that basically forbade the adding of qualifiers to many kinds of references, we got rid of those restrictions on variants because they represented an exception that wasn't really important and only caused confusion. 11.13.2.1 tells you that you can add the same additions to variants as to authorized access points.

For personal names see RDA Rule 9.19.2.1

(Reproduction of Question and Answer from experts from LC)



<<<<<---------->>>>>


RDA Rule 11.13.2.1 : General Guidelines on Constructing Variant Access Points to Represent Corporate Bodies [This rule suggests to Make additions to the name, if considered important for identification]:

  • Addition to a Name Not Conveying the Idea of a Corporate Body 
  • Place Associated with the Body
  • Associated Institution
  • Date Associated with the Body
  • Type of Jurisdiction
  • Other Designation Associated with the Body
  • Number, Date, and Location of a Conference, Etc.

RDA Rule 9.19.2.1 : General Guidelines on Constructing Variant Access Points to Represent Persons

[Revised on 2015-06-18]

See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Thursday, January 24, 2013

Changing Name Authority Record from AACR2 to RDA

  • Change the Descriptive cataloging rules (008/10) to "z", from "c" 
  • In the 040 add cataloging source, e.g. $d DLC (if it doesn't end with this already) and a $e rda.
  • Re-examine the record to see if the heading and also the references are according to RDA rules and LC-PCC PS (if applicable).

General guidelines

Do not create hybrid AACR2/RDA authorized access points in establishing new headings or in making additions to existing headings. Follow one cataloging code or the other in establishing authorized access points.

Catalogers making additions to AACR2 headings or making new headings based on existing AACR2 records will use AACR2 rules and appropriate LCRIs.  Catalogers making additions to RDA headings or making new headings based on existing RDA records will use RDA instructions.

AACR2 1XX fields that are suitable for use under RDA may be used as the base element in an extended RDA authorized access point (such as a name-title or subordinate body record).  When using an AACR2 1XX heading as the base element in an extended RDA authorized access point, the AACR2 authority record must be re-coded to RDA.  Optionally, any other existing dependent records may also be re-coded to RDA.

Approved PCC NACO Policies--Interim Documentation


In March 2012, the PCC Task Group to Formulate or Recommend PCC/NACO RDA Policy on Authority Issues recommended NACO policies and best practices on authority issues in the RDA environment. These policies and best practice recommendations were reviewed by the PCC Policy Committee and either approved as submitted, or approved with revisions.

Consolidated Table [PDF : 22 KB] summarizing all of the task group's recommended NACO policies and best practices, along with the PCC Policy Committee's action.

Individual recommendations: High Priority Recommendations (Word, 52 KB); Medium Priority Recommendations (Word, 29 KB); Low Priority Recommendations (Word, 22 KB)


The RDA Toolkit, the LC-PCC Policy Statements, and the Descriptive Cataloging Manual (DCM) Z1 will reflect the final PCC-approved decisions on the recommended NACO policies and best practices. In the interim, however, please consult this table along with the individual recommendations to identify these new PCC/NACO policies and best practices. The approved policies are in effect now. Some, but not all, specific policies and best practices are described in more detail below.

Conference headings and access points


If an AACR2 name authority record exists for an ongoing conference constructed according to LCRI 24.7B (i.e. the heading for the conference does not include the number date or place of any one specific conference), and the AACR2 heading is acceptable under RDA, PCC RDA-trained catalogers may use the AACR2 form to create RDA authorized access points for individual conferences. These RDA authorized access points will include additions such as number, date, and place, according to RDA 11.13.1.8. The PCC Policy Committee approved the conference recommendation of the PCC Task Group to Formulate or Recommend PCC/NACO RDA Policy on Authority Issues, which allows an "unqualified" RDA conference authorized access point for an ongoing conference to exist along with individual qualified RDA conference authorized access points for the same conference. The "unqualified" RDA authorized access point would be used for serial publications; the qualified RDA authorized access point would be used for monographic publications.

Personal name headings and access points


If an existing AACR2 authority record for a personal name is an undifferentiated name record and there is now a date of birth, a date of death, a fuller form of name, or occupation for the person related to the resource being cataloged, create an RDA differentiated name authority record for that person, remove the appropriate 670 fields from the AACR2 undifferentiated record, and report the necessary bibliographic file maintenance.  For other situations, use the AACR2 undifferentiated authorized access point in the RDA bibliographic record.

Changes taking place in the LC/NACO Authority File

The LC/NACO Authority File is undergoing changes to accommodate RDA implementation. The changes are based on recommendations of the PCC Acceptable Headings Implementation Task Group. PCC catalogers should consult the document Summary of Programmatic Changes to the LC/NACO Authority File: What LC-PCC RDA Catalogers need to know as it contains critical information on working in the LC/NACO Authority File during the RDA transition.

7XX RDA fields in AACR2 authority records

Do not add 7XX fields for RDA forms to any AACR2 name authority record. The addition of an RDA 7XX field authorized during the US RDA Test has been discontinued.
For those name authority records that already contain 7XX fields for RDA forms:
  • If the 1XX and the 7XX in the AACR2 NAR is exactly the same, delete the 7XX. If you are an RDA trained cataloger, re-code the AACR2 NAR to RDA.
  • If the 1XX and the 7XX are not exactly the same, leave the NAR as is: do not remove the 7XX. This NAR will become part of a PCC project to recode the NARs to RDA after examination of the differences, etc.

Reminders:

  • Other than noted above, RDA catalogers may re-code an AACR2 authority record to RDA if there are no changes in the 1xx.
  • Do not change an RDA authority record to be an AACR2 authority record.

Write to the LChelp4rda@loc.gov account if:

  • you have questions about existing headings
  • you need assistance in creating a new RDA authority record because your library is not using RDA for cataloging.
See Also:

See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Access to AACR2 via Cataloger’s Desktop after March 31, 2013

In January 2012 the Library of Congress announced that it would transition from AACR2 (Anglo-American

Cataloguing Rules, second edition) to RDA (Resource Description and Access) on March 31, 2013. AACR2 is currently available via LC’s web-based cataloging documentation subscription service, Cataloger’s Desktop, as well as through RDA Toolkit. In keeping with LC’s decision to switch from AACR2 to RDA, Cataloger’s Desktop will simultaneously change how access to AACR2 is provided.
On April 1, 2013, if you subscribe to both Cataloger’s Desktop and RDA Toolkit (which includes an online version of AACR2), you will continue to have access to AACR2. If you subscribe to Cataloger’s Desktop but not to RDA Toolkit and want online access to AACR2, you will need to establish an RDA Toolkit subscription at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/

To ease the impact of the transition, current Cataloger’s Desktop subscribers will get an additional month for FREE upon subscription renewal. That’s 13 months access to Cataloger’s Desktop at the regular annual subscription rate. This offer is only valid for subscription renewals from November 1, 2012, through October 31, 2013.

Note: AACR2 is the joint property of the American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, and the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals. Copyright © 2005. by ALA, CLA, and CILIP.


AACR2 FAQs
  • You must subscribe to RDA Toolkit if you wish to access AACR2 from within Desktop. 
Q: I know the AACR2 rule number and want to find related rules in RDA. Can I do that?

A: Yes. Just type the AACR2 rule number into the searchbox, enclose it in quotes (e.g., "1.1B1") and then click the Search button. All of the related RDA instructions will be retrieved. You may want to limit the search by selecting the checkbox next to RDA and/or LC-PCC PS.

(Source: CDS, LOC)

Inverted Cross References in NARs for Conferences

Inverted cross-ref in NARs

Example (AACR2)
111 2  National Town & County Planners Congress

411 2 County Planners Congress, National Town &
411 2 Town & County Planners Congress, National

Note: Both variants were provided before when cataloging with AACR2 because of RI 26.3A (References from inverted names of Conferences, Exhibitions, Fairs, Festivals, etc.)—

These references are no longer needed as variants in RDA.  Reason: Key word search in ILS will resolve this need. Please add all the qualifiers (no.; date; place) just like your 111 field for both RDA variants.

LC-PCC PS: When creating an authority record for the collective conference, do not add the numbers/and/or dates to the authorized access point and variants if you are providing variants


<<<<<---------->>>>>

RDA Blog : RDA Blog is a blog on Resource Description and Access (RDA), a new library cataloging standard that provides instructions and guidelines on formulating data for resource description and discovery, organized based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), intended for use by libraries and other cultural organizations replacing Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2). This blog lists description and links to resources on Resource Description & Access (RDA). It is an attempt to bring together at one place all the useful and important information, rules, references, news, and links on Resource Description and AccessFRBRFRADFRSADMARC standardsAACR2BIBFRAME, and other items related to current developments and trends in library cataloging practice.

RDA Blog History: RDA Blog was created by Salman Haider, a Cataloging & Metadata Librarian Blogger & Online Social Media Expert from India. RDA Blog embarked on its journey to provide useful information to Resource Description and Access (RDA) in August 2011. It received good response from librarians, catalogers, and library professionals from all around the world. It is interesting to note that the first hundred thousand pageviews to RDA Blog came in 3 years, but it took just 8 months to reach another hundred thousand pageviews. At present it is viewed at a rate of fifteen to twenty thousand times per month. RDA Blog is widely followed in social media.

See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Sunday, August 28, 2011

OCLC policy on RDA

OCLC Policy on Resource Description and Access (RDA)

OCLC policy statement on RDA Cataloging in WorldCat for the U.S. testing period and beyond


With the installation of capabilities as described in Technical Bulletin 258, OCLC has now implemented most of the MARC 21 format changes for initial support of RDA: Resource Description & Access. OCLC has also implemented links to the RDA toolkit for toolkit subscribers in the Connexion Browser and in Connexion Client 2.3. In the U.S., the Library of Congress, the National Agricultural Library, and the National Library of Medicine coordinated a test that involved those institutions and a group of additional institutions selected from the broader U.S. library community. More information about the testing process can be found on the Library of Congress web site.

The timeline for the testing included a 90-day period in which testing participants familiarized themselves with the content of RDA and the RDA toolkit, a 2nd 90-day period in which the testing participants produced records, and a 3rd 90-day period in which the Steering Committee for the testing evaluated the results and produced its report. That report has now been shared with the wider library community. Widespread adoption of RDA within the U.S. is not expected now until January 2013 or later. OCLC is committed to supporting OCLC members who wish to implement RDA in their libraries but will not require that all libraries adopt RDA.

Many of the institutions that participated in the testing are OCLC member libraries and have added RDA-based records to WorldCat, either online through Connexion or through batchloading. OCLC cataloging members who are not testing participants also have tried RDA Cataloging. Some RDA test participants, including the Library of Congress plan to continue cataloging using RDA with some or all of their cataloging production until the implementation date. OCLC urges that cataloging staff members take time to become familiar with the content and use of RDA before beginning the creation of RDA records. Library of Congress staff have made available a variety of training materials that will help in the familiarization process.
Until further notice, OCLC asks that the following protocols be respected by OCLC member libraries:
  • Catalogers may contribute original cataloging using RDA to WorldCat if desired. (040 $e with value rda and Leader/18 (Desc) coded i if ISBD punctuation is used or blank if not).
  • For materials other than continuing resources, catalogers are asked NOT to edit a WorldCat full-level master record (ELvl values blank148I, and L) to change it from one set of rules to another. In other words, if the record was created according to AACR2 (and coded as such), please do not change the master record to RDA. If the record was created according to RDA (and coded as such), please do not change the master record to AACR2.
  • For records describing continuing resources, a cataloger may change a record from AACR2 (or earlier rules) to RDA as part of the process of updating information in the record. Once the record has been changed to RDA, please do not change it back to AACR2.
  • If a record is a minimal-level or less than minimal-level record (ELvl values KM235, and 7), a cataloger may change the record from AACR2 to RDA as a part of the process of upgrading the record to full-level (ELvl values blank14, and I,). As in the previous bullet, please do not change it back to AACR2 once it has been upgraded and changed to RDA.
  • If an existing record is not coded as following either AACR2 or RDA (i.e. coded blank or i in Leader/18 (Desc) and 040 $e is not present), a cataloger may edit the master record to follow either AACR2 or RDA when upgrading the record.
  • When performing copy cataloging, catalogers may LOCALLY edit records created under any rules to another set of rules. Please do NOT replace the master record for this purpose (unless upgrading as outlined in the previous 2 bullets).
  • If a record created according to either AACR2 or RDA already exists in WorldCat, please do NOT create a duplicate record according to the other code. Such duplicates are not within the scope of the OCLC policy on parallel records and OCLC staff will merge them if found.
These protocols, which applied for the duration of the nine month RDA test period, continue to apply until further notice. OCLC will reconsider this policy during the remainder of 2011 and will seek comment from the OCLC membership on how widespread implementation could affect WorldCat before making policy decisions going forward.

(Source: OCLC website, June 2011)

<<<<<---------->>>>>

RDA Blog : RDA Blog is a blog on Resource Description and Access (RDA), a new library cataloging standard that provides instructions and guidelines on formulating data for resource description and discovery, organized based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), intended for use by libraries and other cultural organizations replacing Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2). This blog lists description and links to resources on Resource Description & Access (RDA). It is an attempt to bring together at one place all the useful and important information, rules, references, news, and links on Resource Description and AccessFRBRFRADFRSADMARC standardsAACR2BIBFRAME, and other items related to current developments and trends in library cataloging practice.

RDA Blog History: RDA Blog was created by Salman Haider, a Cataloging & Metadata Librarian Blogger & Online Social Media Expert from India. RDA Blog embarked on its journey to provide useful information to Resource Description and Access (RDA) in August 2011. It received good response from librarians, catalogers, and library professionals from all around the world. It is interesting to note that the first hundred thousand pageviews to RDA Blog came in 3 years, but it took just 8 months to reach another hundred thousand pageviews. At present it is viewed at a rate of fifteen to twenty thousand times per month. RDA Blog is widely followed in social media.

See also:

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):