RDA: a progress report on the future of cataloguing

Lynne C. Howarthlynne.howarth@utoronto.ca

Laura Maylaura.may@concordia.ca

May 23, 2007

RDABased on information from:

Joint Steering Committee Canadian Committee on CataloguingRDA Outreach Group

and

presentations created by:Joint Steering Committee Deirdre Kiorgaard and Ebe Kartus Jennifer Bowen and John Attig Gordon DunsireChristine Oliver

What is RDA?

Resource Description and Access Content standard Supersedes AACR2 Goes beyond traditional cataloguing

Strong foundations

1841: Panizzi’s rules for British Museum 1876: Cutter’s rules 1902-1949: Separate U.S. and U.K. rules 1961: Lubetzky, IFLA and “Paris Principles” 1967: AACR, North American/UK differences 1969: IFLA and International Standard

Bibliographic Description (ISBD) 1978: AACR2 2009: RDA

RDA builds on AACR2

AACR2: very widely used has been used beyond the 4 author countries

for decades throughout the English speaking world translated into 25 languages

AACR2: constantly evolving amendment and development process

RDA continues:

reflect common usage

enable sharing of records

related to customs and conventions for citing works and recording authorship

derived from publication practices

RDA moves beyond AACR2:

enhances theoretical framework from conceptual models logical design to reflect decision process objectives of the catalogue

broadens designed to be extensible deal with new content, media, carriers context of the whole catalogue or database

internationalization

RDA: the FAQs

why a new standard? how is it different? what is its content? how will I use it? impact? when? who is responsible? how to participate?

Why a new standard?

Changes in the cataloguing environment: electronic resources increase in types of information carriers new types of publications re-use of bibliographic metadata many new communities recognize need for

metadata increase of metadata communication formats

Problems with AACR2

AACR2 written in the context of card catalogues, and dealing primarily with printed materials limitations of the “class of material” concept

when describing materials that belong to more than one class of material

space-saving limitations, e.g. rule of 3 inadequate rules for the description of

ongoing resources

1997 International Conference

1997 International Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR, Torontoinvitational conference of experts

Identified problems: logical inconsistency in the structure underlying AACR lack of explicit principles to guide rule revision process

to achieve consistency how to accommodate seriality how to deal with the content vs. carrier issue internationalization: make it easier to use AACR

outside the Anglo-American context

Theoretical frameworks (IFLA):

simultaneously:

development of conceptual models FRBR 1998Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records FRAD 1999-Functional Requirements for Authority Data

development of international cataloguing principles 2003-

AACR2: revision blitz

1978: AACR2 + revisions in 1988, 1998, 2002

revisions are not enough content vs. carrier issue still not resolved difficulty in adapting rules to deal with new media and

publication types problems of logical consistency

rules structure

revisions only give partial solutions e.g. revision of rule 0.24

AACR2 AACR3

2004: new editionAACR3: resource description and access change the structure add theoretical framework maintains content of AACR2 rules

AACR2 AACR3 RDA 2005: go further!!! if you’re going to change, do it thoroughly

RDAa new standard for resource description and access, designed for the digital world

from RDA Statement of purpose:

“Built on foundations established by the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR), RDA will provide a comprehensive set of guidelines and instructions on resource description and access covering all types of content and media.”

Continuity vs. change

“Why didn’t you just throw out AACR2 and start over?”

Keep the best of what we have

Compatibility with existing records is essential

AACR2: widely used content standard used beyond Anglo-American library community

Goals for RDA guidelines based on principles functional records: records that respond to user needs worldwide use but derived from English language

conventions and customs easy to use and interpret applicable to/operate in web-based environment effective bibliographic control of all media compatible with internationally established principles,

models, and standards can be used beyond library community

Goals for RDA cont’d

Continue these AACR2 strengths:

flexible and allow for different levels of description

enable consistency in practice and sharing of catalogue records

continuity and also constantly evolving

enable precision in searching

reflect common usage

Goals for RDA cont’d

equip cataloguers with the theoretical background they need to exercise “judgment”

underline the functions and objectives of the catalogue

lead the cataloguer through an explicit, logical decision process

support the FRBR user tasks and make the cataloguer aware of the relationship between their work and the user’s success in completing the user tasks

Design principles for RDA Alignment with conceptual models

FRBR: Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records

FRAD: Functional Requirements for Authority Data

Focus on recording the data NOT on data presentation

Ease and efficiency of use Respect for legacy data

RDA and data models

FRBR entity-relationship model IFLA task force world-wide consultation based on the analysis of bibliographic records

FRAD entity-relationship model IFLA task force world-wide consultation based on the analysis of authority records

Purpose of the models

to present a user-focused approachto the bibliographic or authority record

to analyze which parts of the records are used and how are they used

to ensure that a bibliographic or authority record carries the right amount of information to respond to user needs efficiently

to view records within the context of large databases

User tasks or needs

Find Identify Select Obtain

Navigate

FRBR and FRAD models

entities ● in bibliographic or authority records ● important to the user

attributes of the entities

relationshipsbetween the entities

Impact of FRBR and FRAD models

focuses attention on where cataloguing codes need to be strengthened

create records that will fulfill user needs

improve collocation (esp. indexed headings)

give more information about relationships

record information in ways that improve search, navigation and retrieval of appropriate sets of records

ensure records carry information of value to the user

IFLA + the international community

Statement of International Cataloguing Principles broadening of Paris Principles built on the conceptual models:

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records Functional Requirements and Numbering for Authority

Records

towards an international cataloguing code for bibliographic description and access

based on 4 (so far) IFLA Meetings of Experts (IME-ICC): Frankfurt, Buenos Aires, Cairo, Seoul, 5th: Durban

IME Statement of International Cataloguing Principles

highest principle for the construction of a cataloguing code: convenience of the user of the catalogue

focus on the user build on cataloguing traditions increase international sharing of records confirms principle of cataloguing at the

manifestation level

RDA Outline

General introduction Part A – Description Part B – Access point control Part C – tentative new (May 18, 2007)

“data about data” Appendices Glossary Index

RDA Structure

RDA: Part A – 1st section

0. Introduction to part A

1. General guidelines on resource description

2. Identification of the resource – FRBR “Identify”

3. Carrier - FRBR “Select”

4. Content- FRBR “Select”

5. Acquisition and access information - FRBR “Obtain”

RDA: Part A – 2nd section

Relationships:

6. Persons, families, and corporate bodies associated with a resource – FRBR “Find”

7. Related resources – FRBR “Find”

RDA: Part B

Introduction to part B8. General guidelines on access point control9. Access points for persons10. Access points for families11. Access points for corporate bodies12. Access points for places13. Access points for works, etc.14. Other information used in access point control

RDA: Part C (new – May 18-07 JSC)

Elements in the Draft RDA which do not describe the resource per se, but are actually “data about data” E.g., details of the issue or part used as

the basis for the description of a serial or multipart monograph

Instructions on recording “data about data” will be moved to a separate section of RDA, tentatively a new Part C

RDA: authority control

principles of authority control relationship to objectives of the catalogue relationship to user tasks

how to structure an authority record and what elements to include

RDA: Appendices

Appendix A. Capitalization

Appendix B. Abbreviations

Appendix C. Initial articles

Appendix D. Presentation of descriptive data

Appendix E. Presentation of access point control data

followed by: Glossary Index

RDA: differences from AACR2 theoretical framework

data models focus on objectives of the catalogue and underlying

principles includes explicit purpose and scope for each data element guidance based on principles

logical progression through the decision process build cataloguer judgment based on principles focus on content, not on display “guidelines” not rules

RDA: differences from AACR2 mandatory/optional elements – based on FRBR

e.g. place of publication what am I describing

decision about the type of resource how is it issued: single or multipart, ongoing, integrating,

etc.? decision about the type of description

comprehensive analytical

RDA: differences from AACR2 cataloguer guided through the various data

elements purpose and scope where to look for the information to record how to record it how to deal with changes in that element all aspects of data element are brought together

not divided between transcription, notes, access points clear, general instructions written in plain English eliminate “rule of three”

Rethinking GMDs

conceptual separation of content from media and physical carriers chapter on carrier chapter on content

description of all aspects of a bibliographic resource

move to new way of informing user about the type of material

Functions of GMD still relevant

identification “early warning” about type of material

differentiation assists user in identifying and selecting

appropriate resource

search can be used as a controlled vocabulary search

term to refine searches

RDA: carrier and content

how to record media type and its characteristics carrier type and its characteristics content type

encourages recording of information in a structured form use of prescribed terms for consistency typology of terms that are logically consistent

Example: online video

Example: map

How will I use RDA?

primarily designed as a web tool primarily a digital hypertext document designed so that you can zero in on relevant

instructions and navigate the network of cross-references

not designed as a linear print document drafts appear “bloated” because common content

is duplicated JSC and CoP have begun RFP process for the

web developer

How will I use RDA?

possible choices in the design of web tool choose full, concise or customized create customized versions tailored to specific

cataloguing needs, for task-oriented workflow e.g. type of resource: sound recordings, or online

journals, etc. level of detail choose the type of interface:

search, smart sheet or step by step data input templates

Prototype (http://www.rdaonline.org/)

Prototype (http://www.rdaonline.org/)

Prototype (http://www.rdaonline.org/)

Prototype (http://www.rdaonline.org/)

RDA impact

focus on users and the information they need context of the catalogue or large database built on principles clarify and explain relationships between

entities improve collocation (clustering) extensible to deal with new types of material

RDA impact

intention: easy to use content standard theoretical framework to strengthen cataloguer

judgment compatibility with legacy records “re-orientation” rather than “training”

RDA Potential Impact on Workflow

Prior training/familiarization will be key A priority of JSC planning initiatives

MARBI and vendors preparing so as to minimize impact and have “hospitable” systems in place

Availability of Web tool will facilitate transition

RDA/ONIX framework: publisher metadata for harvesting and populating RDA records

When?

Jul 05: Prospectus published; rev. Mar. 07 Oct 05-Apr 06: Pt.A: 1-5; constituency review May-Sep 06: Pt.A: 6-7; constituency review Mar-Jun 07: Pt.A: 3 (Carrier); constituency review Jun-Sep 07: Pt.A: 6-7 revised; constituency

review Dec 07-Mar 08: Pt.B; constituency review Jul-Sep 08: Complete draft for review IFLA 2008: “Beta” view Early 2009: Publication of RDA

RDA and other standards

RDA/ONIX framework for resource categorization Content and carrier terms

RDA/MARC21 mapping RDA/Dublin core mapping Discussions with DC/IEEE-LOM IFLA ISBD Review Group (and Future

Directions Study Group responsible for ISBD Consolidated [2007])

RDA and other stakeholders

OCLC invited comments from other national

cataloguing committees ILS vendors open access to drafts at JSC website

http://www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/rda/html broad invitation to comment

RDA discussion list, etc.

How can you participate?

Comment on drafts Canadian Committee on Cataloguing

formally/ informally encourage others to participate

watch IME-ICC developments learn the language of FRBR and FRAD contact Chris Oliver, Chair of CCC, (or Lynne

Howarth, CLA rep to CCC) with questions, comments, etc. chris.oliver@mcgill.ca lynne.howarth@utoronto.ca

Thank-you!

Questions for Laura or Lynne …?