RDA Training 1: Overview & Future of Cataloging (These presentations on RDA (Resource Description and Access) were created by Clara Liao, Head of Cataloging at the Georgetown University Law Library, for internal training purposes. Please direct any questions or comments to Clara at yl233@law.georgetown.edu.)
5. MARC’s problems:
Cannot “talk” to many other metadata codes; not web friendly;
Lack of explicit linking relationship between bibliographic and authority records cause
problems when some authorized access points (authority heading forms) get
updates. The bibliographic records will still use the old forms.
There are hierarchical structure in some subject headings, for example:
Based on LCSH: public law is a general term; under it, there are several narrower
terms, such as Administrative law, Constitutional law, Criminal law, etc. But the
relationship not being shown up in the current OPAC module.
5
17. The current cataloging procedures focus on the piece at hand in many/most cases
rather than the relationship of one work/expression/manifestation with other
works/expressions/manifestations.
AACR2 covers most of descriptive cataloging processes.
17
20. Sections 1–4 cover elements corresponding to the entity attributes defined in FRBR
and FRAD; sections 5–10 cover elements corresponding to the relationships defined
in FRBR and FRAD
RDA will not describe resource based on the different formats of the resource like
AACR2 does. Catalogers view resource not just as a static/physical/concrete resource
at hand, but as a intellectual/artistic work. The elements for entity attributes of
works/expressions/manifestations are covered from Section 1-4, which means
cataloger cannot go to one chapter or certain chapters for the answers while they
have questions on cataloging certain types of resources as they followed AACR2 rules,
but all through the RDA chapters.
20
21. FRBR is a conceptual entity-relationship model. It offers us a fresh perspective on the
structure and relationships of bibliographic and authority data.
FRAD is an extension of the FRBR model. Together they can assist users to execute
the following tasks in a more effective and efficient way:
find, identify, select, and obtain. Moreover, because both models focus on inherent
relationships among the bibliographic
entities, they can help users to navigate the bibliographic universe easily.
21
23. NOTE: RDA hasn’t covered subject relationship among Group 1, 2, 3.
23
24. It’s easy to browse the bibliographic data and relationship among
works/expressions/manifestations under the FRBR model.
24
25. Same key word search in LC catalog in Jan. 2007: if not accessing the detailed records,
it’s difficult to tell the differences between #5 and #6; #7 and #8.
25
26. No great improvement in OPAC display after 4 years:
Authors not being grouped together; some entries cannot be distinguished in the
browse list.
26
27. RDA 0.0 purpose and scope:
RDA provides a set of guidelines and instructions on formulating data to support
resource discovery.
The data created using RDA to describe a resource are designed to assist users
performing the following tasks:
find—i.e., to find resources that correspond to the user’s stated search criteria
identify—i.e., to confirm that the resource described corresponds to the resource
sought, or to distinguish between two or more resources with similar characteristics
select—i.e., to select a resource that is appropriate to the user’s needs
obtain—i.e., to acquire or access the resource described.
The data created using RDA to describe an entity associated with a resource (a
person, family, corporate body, concept, etc.) are designed to assist users performing
the following tasks:
find—i.e., to find information on that entity and on resources associated with the
entity
identify—i.e., to confirm that the entity described corresponds to the entity sought,
or to distinguish between two or more entities with similar names, etc.
clarify—i.e., to clarify the relationship between two or more such entities, or to
clarify the relationship between the entity described and a name by which that entity
is known
understand—i.e., to understand why a particular name or title, or form of name or
title, has been chosen as the preferred name or title for the entity.
27
28. The initial chapter in each section of RDA sets out the functional objectives and
principles underlying the guidelines and instructions in that section, and specifies
core elements to support those functional objectives.
Subsequent chapters within each section cover attributes or relationships that
support a specific user task
28
31. Sections and chapters covering the attributes of concept, object, and event defined in
FRAD, and the “subject” relationship defined in FRBR will not be developed until after
the initial release of RDA. Chapter 16 covers the place, which sometimes is also used
as corporate body (jurisdiction)
31
32. NOTE: Section 5 covers primary relationships between work, expression,
manifestation and item: which refers to
The relationships between a work, expression, manifestation, and item that are
inherent in the FRBR definitions of those entities:
a)the relationship between a work and an expression through which that work is
realized;
b)the relationship between an expression of a work and a manifestation that
embodies that expression;
c)the relationship between a manifestation and an item that exemplifies that
manifestation
Section 8 covers relationship between works, expressions, manifestations and items:
which refers to related works, expressions, manifestations, etc.
32
33. Compared with AACR2, data coded under RDA rules would be more friendly for
potential computer using and analyzing. Hopefully, we can get more user friendly
auto-analysis data.
33
