RDA FOR ALL:RDA, MUSIC DISCOVERY, AND BEYOND

PLENARY III

SponsorsMLA Bibliographic Control CommitteeMLA Emerging Technologies & Services CommitteeMLA Public Services Committee

RDA for All• Overview of RDA

• Impact of RDA on Public Services

• Impact of RDA on Technical Services

• RDA and Music Discovery

• Developments Beyond RDA

RDA for All

• Slides will be available on the BCC website:

• http://bcc.musiclibraryassoc.org/bcc.html

RDA for All• Speakers

• Kathy Glennan University of Maryland• Stephanie Bonjack University of Southern California• Nara Newcomer University of Missouri-Kansas City• Stephen Henry University of Maryland

RDA OVERVIEWKathy GlennanUniversity of MarylandMarch 2, 2013

The Evolution of RDA• Problem: In the late 1980s, librarians began to realize that

AACR2 needed revision to address various problems, including:• Changing nature of library resources• Separating “content” from “carrier”• Clarifying bibliographic relationships• Coming to a common understanding about what constitutes a

“work”• Resolving issues around “seriality”

The Evolution of RDA• Solution #1: Conferences held, focusing on special issues

• 1989 Airlie House Forum on Multiple Versions • 1997 International Conference on the Principles and Future

Development of AACR • Solution #2: Changes made to AACR2

• AACR2r published in 2002; updated in 2004• Solution #3: Draft of AACR3

• 2004, Draft of Part 1 released for review• Reviewers felt this needed a new focus and a new name, so…

RDA was born!• Drafts available for open review, 2005-2009

• Various constituencies conducted reviews and wrote proposals for change

• MLA contributed comments and proposals through the American Library Association

• Development took longer than anticipated• Incorporated structure, concepts and terminology from two IFLA

documents, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998) and Functional Requirements for Authority Data (2009)

• Aligned with IFLA’s Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (2009)

RDA’s Scope• Includes instructions for recording

• Descriptive elements relating to:• Works, Expressions, Manifestations, Items

• Attributes associated with creators and contributors: • Persons, Families and Corporate Bodies

• Relationships among and between the above entities, such as:• Person to work

• Composer; Arranger of music; Performer; Conductor• Work to work

• Musical variations based on; Cadenza composed for

• Will eventually include instructions for concepts, objects, events and places

RDA Goals• Focus on user tasks: Find, Identify, Select, Obtain• Simplify, clarify and update the rules

• Get rid of unnecessary library jargon, like Latin abbreviations• Remove ambiguous & inconsistent terminology• Eliminate redundant rules

• Emphasis on the rules as a content standard• Separate recording of data from display of data

• Create a flexible and extensible framework• Compatible with multiple data storage and communication models,

such as MARC21 and Dublin Core – and potentially future models like LC’s Bibliographic Framework Initiative

• Maintain backwards compatibility with AACR2 records

RDA Controversies• Too much change vs. not enough change• Cost

• Online product requires annual subscription; unwieldy in print• Catalogers need retraining

• Elimination of General Material Designation• Used in AACR2 to identify broad types of resources

Example: Symphony no. 5 [sound recording]• Replaced by separate elements for content, media and carrier

types, but the textual terms aren’t very user friendly performed music – audio – audio disc

• Full benefit only realized once MARC is replaced• Most local systems only doing “bare bones” implementation

RDA Benefits• Registered vocabularies: http://rdvocab.info/ • Designed to function in different implementation scenarios

• ‘Flat file’ database structure (no links)• Linked bibliographic and authority records• Relational / object-oriented database structure• Linked data

• Instructions not tied to physical format of resources• Can accommodate metadata from multiple sources (e.g.,

ONIX data)

RDA Milestones• Published Summer 2010

• RDA Toolkit (online product); also in print• U.S. National Libraries’ Test, Oct.-Dec. 2010

• National libraries and test partners, included group from MLA/OLAC

• Bibliographic and Authority records created in live environment• Participants’ feedback led to additional recommendations for

change• MARC21 updated: 2008-present• National libraries’ implementation date: March 31, 2013

• All authority record creation (affects all NACO participants)• Most bibliographic record creation

IMPACT OF RDA ON TECHNICAL SERVICESKathy GlennanUniversity of MarylandMarch 2, 2013

Training Issues• Identify affected Technical Services staff

• Original catalogers• Copy catalogers• Acquisitions specialists

• Determine what kind of training is needed for each• Provide the appropriate level of training for the work being done• Create in-house training, or use presentations, webinars, etc.

developed by others• Determine when and how to train original catalogers

• Opportunity for “ground-up” cataloging training• Collective review of records before submission?

Training Issues• Be aware of national policies and guidelines

• LC-PCC Policy Statements• BIBCO Standard Record Metadata Application Profile• Provider-Neutral E-Resource Guidelines• OCLC RDA Policy Statement

• Create local policies• When to use RDA records• What changes are acceptable?• Can you derive a new record from an RDA record, even if you’re

not yet trained in RDA?

Training Resources• LC/PCC online training available at Catalogers Learning

Workshop website: http://www.loc.gov/catworkshop/ • LC-PCC Policy Statements incorporated into RDA Toolkit,

linked to relevant instructions• PCC guidelines: http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/ • ALCTS webinars: http://

www.ala.org/alcts/confevents/upcoming/webinar/cat• Sample records and workflows available in RDA Toolkit • Music cataloging presentations on BCC website:

http://bcc.musiclibraryassoc.org/bcc.html • MLA Best Practices out for review now!

Challenges for Catalogers• Terminology changes

• “Audio disc” not “Sound disc” and “Cello” not “Violoncello”• Almost no abbreviations

• But retained for duration, vocal parts (SATB), and thematic indexes

• New MARC fields and subfields to learn and use• And to validate, index, and display in the local system

Challenges for Catalogers• More decisions left to “catalogers judgment”

• Must keep user tasks in mind (Find, Identify, Select, Obtain)• May need to accept less consistency among bibliographic records

• Capitalization practice• Spelling of “color” vs. “colour”

• Updates to local cataloging policies needed• RDA is constantly changing

• Updates to online RDA Toolkit every two months

Big or Incremental Change?• Authority records

• All NACO participants must be retrained• Set date for change-over – no choice (3/31/13)• Automated changes rolling out to authority file to make records

RDA compliant• Records that cannot be corrected through this process must be updated

manually as encountered• New data elements to learn and encode as appropriate• Major documentation updates, best practice changes, etc.• Opportunity to review local authority control practices and the staff

involved

BIG

Big or Incremental Change?• Bibliographic records

• Depends on local implementation decisions• No set date for implementation at this time• If converting all cataloging records to RDA as encountered – BIG

CHANGE• If working with existing cataloging records without changing the

cataloging code – more of an INCREMENTAL CHANGE• Use RDA for original cataloging and substantial upgrades to copy?• Need to start developing familiarity and comfort with RDA

instructions• Must put training to use on a regular basis, or retraining will be

necessary

Local choice