Monday, June 22, 2015

Numbering of Serials in RDA Cataloging

Resource Description & Access (RDA)

Numbering of Serials

  • Numeric and/or alphabetic designation of first issue or part of sequence, chronological designation of first issue or part of sequence, numeric and/or alphabetic designation of last issue or part of sequence, and chronological designation of last issue or part of sequence are CORE ELEMENTS. Other numbering is optional.
P         Look at instruction 2.6.1

Numbering of serials is the identification of each of the issues or part of a serial. It may include a numeral, a letter, a character, or the combination of these with or without an accompanying caption (volume, number, etc.) and/or a chronological designation (RDA 2.6.2-2.6.5).

Recording Numbering of Serials
  • Record numbers expressed as numerals or as words applying the general guidelines given under 1.8. Transcribe other words, characters, or groups of words and/or characters as they appear on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.  Substitute a slash for a hyphen, as necessary, for clarity.
  • Record the number for the first issue; if it has ceased publication, record the last issue
  • If the numbering starts a new sequence with a different system, record the numbering of the first issue of each sequence and the numbering of the last issue of each sequence.
Examples:
362 0# $a Volume X, number 1-          (formatted style)
362 1# $a Began with January 2010 issue (unformatted style) 



[Source: Library of Congress]

[This RDA Blog post is best viewed in Google Chrome web browser]

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

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

Library Circulation : Glossary of Library & Information Science

Librarianship Studies & Information Technology


New Post on Librarianship Studies & Information Technology Blog provides a comprehensive definition of Library Circulation and related terms, viz. Circulation Desk, Circulation Analysis, Circulation History, and Circulation Statistics.

Librarianship Studies & Information Technology

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Libhub Initiative



The Libhub Initiative aims to raise the visibility of Libraries on the Web by actively exploring the promise of BIBFRAME and Linked Data. 

The objective of The Libhub Initiative is to publish BIBFRAME resources to the Web, cross-link resources which are common among libraries, and, through cross-linking improve the ability for people to discover these resources on the open Web. The goal is ultimately that users would then be able to click on appropriate resources and be taken back to the library’s catalog. 

Libraries and memory organizations have rich content and resources the Web can't see or use today -- effectively making them dark collections and invisible archives.


IMAGINE if libraries could represent themselves together in a way the Web could see and understand.

This unified voice and utility is among the core promises of BIBFRAME and the Linked Data in Libraries movement. 

[Source: Libhub]


BIBFRAME (Bibliographic Framework) is a data model for bibliographic description. BIBFRAME was designed to replace the MARC standards, and to use linked data principles to make bibliographic data more useful both within and outside the library community. 






See also:

Additional links of possible interest 

For years I have been confronted by non-library people about the relevance of libraries and library catalog in particular in this digital era. I was asked - What is their usefulness when your huge library data cannot interact with the web? Now with Libhub, I hope to answer them in future .... .... {Salman Haider}

Response by John Richardson, Vice-President, Library & Vendor Partnerships, Zepheira

Hello Salman:

Thank you for your support and we too in North America are struggling with the same perceptions about libraries and their relevance. That’s why we created the Libhub Initiative. 

We are appreciating your posts and ... ... ... 

Your question: I particularly wanted to know if the Library of Congress has implemented BIBFRAME through Libhub or Zepheira. I do not see my cataloged records in Library of Congress database searchable through the internet. What happened to the job Library of Congress contracted to Zepheira?

Answer: BIBFRAME (BF) is still evolving as a framework and several organizations including National Library of Medicine, George Washington University, University of California Davis and Zepheira along with LC are working on it - so it isn’t ready for production at this point. There is a good (and recent!) posting here on some of this work. 


A clarification on Libhub - this is a separate project that will take MARC records and transform them into BF resources and we then publish them to the Web. In essence, we are creating a “linking” network with this data. The LC database has not been converted into BF resources at present and I’m not certain what their status is on that. Our contract with LC has concluded with our deliverables of architecting the framework. LC has hired other teams to work on a BF editor, data conversion tools and other elements. 

Denver Public Library is the first library Zepheira has worked with to exposes their data to the Web. ~850,000 bib records transformed into 3.7M BF resources and those are being ingested by the Web as I write this. Enclosed is a screen shot that will help illustrate how this can work. (You can try a Google search from your location to see what comes up - and in what order). “molly brown cookbook” or “molly brown papers”

RDA Blog
Click to Enlarge

COMMENTS / MAILS / FEEDBACK BY RDA BLOG USERS

Teri Embrey, MLIS, Chief Librarian, Pritzker Military Museum & Library, Chicago, IL

Thank you for sharing the link to this useful resource. 

At the Pritzker Military Museum & Library, we have adopted some linked data practices which are practical now.  These practices are made possible by RDA and other schema that have been developed over the last few years.

First, our website has complete integration with the Worldcat API.  For our website metadata, we are using OCLC subject headings.  Here’s an example of a holding:

·         NC-4 March by F. E. Bigelow

When we upload photos of collection items to our website, we include the OCLC number in the photo name.  We are actively photographing our rare books and will move to photographing the covers of pre-1980 items from the circulating collection when that is completed.

We are also participating as a Wikipedia GLAM institution.  For more on our Wikipedia GLAM project, see:


As we move forward with RDA and other linked data standards, it is important to show potential stakeholders (administrators, library trustees, the general public) some of the real world applications of all the work we as a profession are doing behind the scenes to improve their discovery experiences.  Have you thought about including a section on your blog on catalogs, websites, etc. that are making the most of the RDA?


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

Salman Haider
LibHub says libraries need to use the Web. Hmm. They've been using the web and Internet resources since Mosaic ca. 1994...and before that. MARC, RDA, Dublin Core, and other iterations of cataloging, all, have issues of describing things as well as searching for them. For PhD candidates, I found a simple MEMO field in MS Access with all of the information in an LC record was at least more suited to searching than some of the library software. Do the above cataloging formats do as well? Musicians don't think so

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

Clara Liao, Head of Cataloging & Metadata Sevices, Georgetown Law Library
It sounds great. And Zepheira just announced the launch of libhub initiative for academic libraries. However, I contact them recently, they would charge $30,000 to $39,000 to join the project for one year (attendee may upload up to 100,000 records. ), bit expensive for many academic libraries with tight budget for just one year linked data testing.

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

Salman Haider
Interesting initiative, especially for those concerned with RDA and metadata issues

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


[Revised 2015-06-19]

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

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


Sunday, May 31, 2015

Title in More Than One Language or Script in RDA

Question: Which title to choose as the Title Proper if the title statement of a polyglot monograph appears in multiple languages, according to Resource Description & Access (RDA) Cataloging Rules? 

[Question asked on the Google+ Community RDA Cataloging, a companion Google+ Community for RDA Blog.] 

RESOURCE DESCRIPTION & ACCESS RDA


Answer: According to RDA Rule 2.3.2.4 if the content of the resource is written, spoken, or sung and the source of information for the title proper has a title in more than one language or script then choose as the title proper the title in the language or script of the main content of the resource. This rule further prescribes that, If the content of the resource is not written, spoken, or sung, or if there is no main content in a single language then the cataloger should choose the title proper on the basis of the sequence, layout, or typography of the titles on the source of information.

All the librarians / catalogers are invited to join RDA Cataloging. It is an online community/group/forum for library and information science students, professionals and cataloging & metadata librarians. It is a place where people can get together to share ideas, trade tips and tricks, share resources, get the latest news, and learn about Resource Description and Access (RDA), a new cataloging standard to replace AACR2, and other issues related to cataloging and metadata


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

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

Saturday, May 23, 2015

RDA Cataloging Examples

RDA Cataloging Examples of Compilations, Works, Selections, Translations & Cutter Numbers in MARC 21 from Classification and Shelflisting Manual (CSM), Library of Congress Classification (LCC) - Literary Authors: Subarrangement of Works [F 633] 

Resource Description & Access (RDA)
Resource Description & Access (RDA) Examples

Descriptive cataloging part only - For those not using LCC 

Examples of collections.

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. 
245 10 $a Duineser elegien. 
[A collection of poems that has not been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. Table P-PZ40 applies. Use .A61-.Z458, Separate works

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. 
240 10 $a Duineser Elegien. $l English 
245 10 $a The Duino elegies / $c Rainer Maria Rilke ; translated by John Waterfield. 
[An English translation of a collection of poems that has not been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. Table P-PZ40 applies. Use .A61-.Z458, Separate works, and use the Translation Table to extend the title Cutter by -13] 

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. 
245 10 $a The Duino elegies / $c Rainer Maria Rilke ; translated by John Waterfield.  
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Duineser Elegien. 
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Duineser Elegien. $l English. 
[A collection of poems that has not been assigned an RDA conventional collective title, along with a parallel English translation. Table P-PZ40 applies. Use .A61-.Z458, Separate works, and use the Translation Table to extend the title Cutter by -13] 

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. 
240 10 $a Works 
245 10 $a Sämtliche Werke. 
[Rilke’s complete works, to which has been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. Table P-PZ40 applies. Append date, Collected works, By date

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926.
240 10 $a Poems. $k Selections 
245 10 $a Duineser Elegien ; $b Die Sonette an Orpheus / $c Rainer Maria Rilke. 
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Duineser Elegien. 
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Sonette an Orpheus. 
[A compilation that has been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. P-PZ40 applies. Use .A6 date, Selected works. Selections. By date

100 1# $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. 
240 10 $a Poems. $k Selections. $l English 
245 10 $a Duino elegies ; $b The sonnets to Orpheus / $c Rainer Maria Rilke ; translated by Robert Hunter ; illustrated by Maureen Hunter. 
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Duineser Elegien. $l English. 
700 12 $a Rilke, Rainer Maria, $d 1875-1926. $t Sonette an Orpheus. $l English. 
[An English translation that has been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. P-PZ40 applies. Use .A2 date, Translations (Collected or selected). English. By date

100 1# $a Levine, Philip, $d 1928- 
240 10 $a Works. $k Selections 
245 10 $a Names of the lost : $b poems / $c by Philip Levine. 
[A collection of poems that has been assigned an RDA conventional collective title. Table P-PZ40 applies. Use .A6 date, Selected works. Selections. By date

100 1# $a Wilde, Oscar, $d 1854-1900. 
240 10 $a Plays 
245 10 $a The plays of Oscar Wilde. 
[Complete plays assigned an RDA conventional collective title. Wilde has his own development in the schedule at PR5810-5828. Use PR5815, Collected dramas. By date

100 1# $a Tolstoy, Leo, $c graf, $d 1828-1910. 
240 10 $a Short stories. $k Selections. $l English 
245 14 $a The death of Ivan Ilych and other stories. 
[Selected short stories translated into English. Tolstoy has his own development at PG3365-3417. Use PG3366.A15A-Z, Translations. English. Collected novels and tales. By translator or editor
[Source: Classification and Shelflisting Manual, Library of Congress]


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

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

Saturday, May 16, 2015

Edition in RDA & AACR2 Cataloging with MARC 21 Examples

Resource Description & Access RDA

Edition

  • Designation of edition and designation of a named revision of an edition are CORE ELEMENTS. Other sub-elements of edition statements are optional.
An edition statement is a statement identifying the edition to which a resource belongs. An edition statement may also include a designation of a named revision of an edition. An edition statement may also include a statement or statements of responsibility relating to the edition and/or to a named revision of an edition.

This data is recorded in MARC field 250

  • Look at instruction 2.5.1
Transcribe an edition statement as it appears on the source of information. Apply the general guidelines on transcription given under 1.7.  Following various LCPS in 1.7 and 1.8 leads you to always transcribe the data as found.  Appendix B4 says, “For transcribed elements, use only those abbreviations found in the sources of information for the element.”

Examples:
Source reads:   Third revised edition
AACR2 says:  250 $a 3rd rev. ed.
RDA says:       250 $a Third revised edition

Source reads:   2nd enlarged ed., revised
AACR2 says:  2nd enl. ed., rev.           
RDA says:       2nd enlarged ed., revised


Recording Changes in Edition Statement (2.20.4.5)

·         If edition statements differ from one part of a multipart monograph to another, make a note if the difference is considered to be important for identification or access.

  • For serials, if an edition statement is added, deleted, or changed on a subsequent issue or part of a serial, make a note if the change is important for identification or access.
  • For integrating resources, change the edition statement to reflect the current iteration if the change does not require a new description.  However, if the earlier edition statement is considered to be important, make a note for the earlier statement. 

[Source: Library of Congress]


[This RDA Blog post is best viewed in Google Chrome web browser]

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

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

Saturday, May 9, 2015

Glossary of Library & Information Science

Glossary of Library & Information Science


About the Glossary: Glossary of Library & InformationScience is a glossary and dictionary of terms and acronyms of librarianship, library science, information science, and information technology. This is brought out by Salman Haider for the librarians all across the globe and the users of Librarianship Studies & Information Technology blog. Glossary will include everything from traditional library terms to vocabulary of modern avenues in information technology. When completed the Glossary of Library & Information Science will become an essential part of every library’s and librarian’s reference collection and will also be helpful to Librarians, LIS i-School Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) & Ph.D Students & Researchers and IT Professionals. This glossary will also be available as an e-book.


Following terms are the first to be added to the Glossary of Library & Information Science

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Compilations, Selections, Translations in RDA & AACR2 & Cutter Numbers : Questions & Answers


How do you cutter a translation of a new collection of stories or poems by one author? How would you account for the collection title in the original language?

Under the new guidelines in RDA, many compilations of poems, stories, etc. by one author that used to be cuttered and treated as separate works according to the old LCRI 25.10 because the collection had a “distinctive” title are now given a conventional collective title and cuttered as collections or selections according to CSM F633. 

However, there isn’t an example in F633 which illustrates what to do with the original title proper of a translation of collected poems, stories, etc. if the original collection title was “distinctive”. In some cases, the collection in the original language wasn’t published long enough ago for it to have necessarily “become known” by that title (the original collection and translation may even be published in the same year). So, according to RDA 6.2.2.10, the translation of such a collection would be cuttered as a translation of selected works and have the conventional collective title in the 240. However, it seems like there should also be some way to trace the collection title proper in the original language. Would it be appropriate to trace it in an author-title added entry as in LCCN 2014007357?

Here’s an example:

The title “Lashing skies” by Madeleine Monette, is an English translation of the French collection of poems, “Ciel à outrances” (LCCN 2012493907)

Here’s another:

“Seasonal time change” is an English translation on LCCN 2013465420 “Umstellung der Zeit”

Should the preferred title for these translations be the conventional collective title, “Poems.‡k Selections.‡l English” and should you use the A2 cutter from Table P-PZ40, or, in cases like this in which the record for the collection in the original language has already been cataloged according to AACR2 rules, should you make an exception, use the original collection title as the preferred title, and cutter it as a translation of a separate work?

Question by Rachel F. (Librarian, United States) on RDA Blog


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

Please find answer to above question from Janis L. Young , Policy and Standards Division, Library of Congress.  RDA Blog on behalf of all the users thanks Ms. Janis for her expert help....


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


Dear Salman,

The policy on the classification of collections that are translations did not change significantly with the implementation of RDA.  The policy is just pertinent to more collections now, because of the prevalence of RDA conventional collective titles due to LC’s current interpretation of 6.2.2.10. 

Collections in the original language that are assigned conventional collective titles are classed in the “collected works” or “selected works” number.

Translated collections (or collections of translations) that are assigned conventional collective titles are classed in the “Translations (Collected or selected)” numbers.

Here’s a made-up example of a poet who writes in German, and whose latest poetry collection was translated into English.  Let’s assume the use of Table P-PZ40:


050 00 $a PT2702.E47 $b A6 [date]
100 1# $a Bergman, Heidi.
240 10 $a Poems. $k Selections
245 10 $a Frühling / $c Heidi Bergman.

050 00 $a PT2702.E47 $b A2 [date]
100 1# $a Bergman, Heidi.
240 10 $a Poems. $k Selections. $l English
245 10 $a Spring / $c Heidi Berman ; translated from the German by August Heier.

The collection in the original language and the collection in translation are not shelved together.

CSM F 633 sec. 1.a provides guidelines on the use of collected works, selected works, and translations. The Rainer Maria Rilke examples in sec. 3 are also pertinent.

As for cases in which the collection in the original language was cataloged under AACR2 and classified as a separate work, and now the translation is being assigned an RDA conventional collective title: the general practice is to class the translation according to the above rule. That is, class it with collected and selected translations, not with the original work.

All the best,

Janis L. Young
Policy and Standards Division
Library of Congress

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

Friday, April 24, 2015

RDA Rules Toolkit & LC-PCC PS Revision

RDA Toolkit Update, April 14, 2015 


A new release of the RDA Toolkit is published on Tuesday, April 14. This message will cover several points you should be aware of related to the release. 

TOPIC 1: Changes in RDA Content
TOPIC 2: Change in Content in LC-PCC PSs
TOPIC 3: Functional Changes in the RDA Toolkit

TOPIC 1: Changes in RDA Content

There are two types of changes in the RDA content for this update: 1) the fourth annual major update to RDA based on the decisions made by the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC) at their November 2014 meeting; and 2) “Fast Track” changes that are relatively minor and typical of a release update.

Revisions from JSC actions:
The changes to individual instructions are identifiable by the “revision history” icon in the RDA Toolkit (a dark blue rectangular icon with the date "2015/04").  A complete listing of all changes due to the proposal process will appear in the left-side table of contents pane on the RDA tab in the Toolkit, at the bottom under “RDA Update History”—you will see an additional entry there for the “2015 April Update.” 

The attached document (summary rda changes 2015.pdf) lists the main changes to RDA due to the JSC update.  Many of the changes in this update package are due to re-numbering of instructions and references (without a change in actual content) and are not included in the attached listing. 
To help you focus on the more important changes to the instructions, some parts of the attached summary have been highlighted in yellow to draw your attention.  Some noteworthy changes:

           
Statement of Responsibility (2.4, etc. and 2.17.3.5):  Instructions that distinguished between “statements of responsibility” (2.4) and statements indicating a “performer, narrator, and/or presenter” (7.23) or “artistic and/or technical credit” (7.24) have been removed.  While information formerly recorded in 7.23 and 7.24 are now considered statements of responsibility, the cataloger can judge whether that information is best transcribed as part of the statement of responsibility (e.g., MARC 245$c), or recorded as notes (e.g., MARC 508, 511). The core requirement to transcribe the first or most important statement of responsibility should be fulfilled before recording others in a note.

Noun Phrases Occurring with a Statement of Responsibility (2.4.1.8): The instruction to always treat a noun phrase occurring with a statement of responsibility as part of the statement of responsibility has been replaced with an instruction to treat a noun phrase occurring with a statement of responsibility as part of the statement of responsibility if 1) the sequence, layout, or typography indicates the phrase is intended to be part of the statement of responsibility and 2) the noun phrase is indicative of the role of the person named in the statement of responsibility.  Note this is not a return to the AACR2 practice, which included instructions about the role of the person, but said nothing about typography, layout, etc. In cases of doubt, treat the noun phrase as part of the statement of responsibility.

Distribution Statement (2.9), Manufacture Statement (2.10), and Copyright Date (2.11):  The “core if” requirements for the statements and sub-elements of “distribution statement,” “manufacture statement,” and “copyright date” have been eliminated. These elements may be recorded according to cataloger judgment.

Preferred Title for the Work (6.2.2, etc.):  There have been some significant structural changes to the layout and completion of RDA instructions for preferred titles for works, although few represent changes significant changes in LC practice.  There are significant changes in two areas:  choreographic works and books of the Bible known as the Protestant Apocrypha.  Although choreographic works were not directly covered in RDA, examples reflective of the former LCRI practice had been included; choreographic works are now treated as other works in RDA, and examples have been changed accordingly.  Those who deal with choreographic works (or, more likely, works about choreographic works) should examine the revised “Choreographic Works” section of the LC-PCC PS for 6.27.1.9.  The guidelines provide information on creating new authority records, guidance on dealing with existing authority records, and a link to the new subject practices that will be part of the Subject Headings Manual.  For the books of the Protestant Apocrypha, individual books are now to be named directly as a sub-division of the Bible (e.g. Bible. Baruch), the same as individual books of the Old and New Testaments.

Authorized Access Points Representing a Person (9.19.1, etc.): Several instructions in 9.19.1 have been revised to provide the cataloger greater flexibility in choosing an appropriate addition to break a conflict if the additions from 9.19.1.2 and 9.19.1.3 are not available or do not provide adequate distinction.  See the relevant LC-PCC PSs for the “optional addition” of these elements when there is no conflict.  

Fast Track changes
An attached PDF file identifies the "Fast Track" changes to RDA that will be included in this release (6JSC-Sec-15.pdf); Fast Track changes are not added to the RDA Update History.  While you are encouraged to peruse the changes, there are no significant changes.

TOPIC 2: Change in Content in LC-PCC PSs

A summary of LC-PCC PS updates incorporated in this release is attached (LCPCCPS_changes_2015_April.pdf).  Many of the changes to the LC-PCC PSs are related to RDA changes (re-numbering, new references, etc.).  Several PSs are being deleted because the content has been incorporated into RDA itself or the RDA update makes the PS obsolete.  As noted above, the LC-PCC PS for 6.27.1.9 should be reviewed by those who deal with choreographic works, and the PSs for 9.19.1.5, Option-9.19.1.8, Option should be reviewed by those who deal with personal name authority records.
The PSs on manuscripts and works of art have been revised and relocated to 6.2.2.6 because of RDA changes.

TOPIC 3: Functional Changes in the RDA Toolkit

There are two functional changes in the RDA Toolkit that you should be aware of:

a) For reasons associated with the international use of the RDA Toolkit, the names of the Books and Groups of Books of the Bible have been removed from the text of the instructions in Chapter 6, and are now available on the contents pane on the “Tools” tab (see “Books of the Bible”).  Other than the change for individual books of the Apocrypha listed above in Topic 1, there is no change in LC-PCC practice because we use the names of the books and groups of books that were previously listed in RDA as well as the title "Bible. Apocrypha" for that group of books.

b) The RDA index has been removed.  Although formerly made available in the online Toolkit, the index was produced only as a byproduct of the printed RDA; this has been discontinued as it was burdensome to maintain.  The online search features provide a reasonable replacement for the index; see the “Search Tips” in the RDA Toolkit on the “Help” screen for more information on searching.

The next planned release of the RDA Toolkit will be in August 2015.

The documents attached to this email may also be found on the Web:
LC Summary of 2015 RDA Updates: http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/added_docs.html   
Fast Track entries included in the April 2015 update of the RDA Toolkit: http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC-Sec-15.pdf
Changes in LC-PCC Policy Statements in the April 2015 release of the RDA Toolkithttp://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/lcps_access.html


[Source : Library of Congresss, Policy and Standards Division]