> -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access > [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Weinheimer Jim > Sent: March 17, 2011 7:19 AM > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA "draft"
..... > > Compare this with the ONIX Best Practices at > http://www.bisg.org/docs/Best_Practices_Document.pdf and you will see > that *each field* has an associated business case in its favor. > Although I don't think this level is necessary for library cataloging > rules, at some point something will have to be done, because otherwise > the changes RDA offers seem completely random and strange with no > overall purpose--at least this is how they seem to me and I am sure how > they seem to many others. I still see *no tangible advantages* > whatsoever and I cannot imagine that a non-library administrator would > see any more than I do. The RDA Element Set View (as opposed to the main RDA text) already closely resembles this ONIX document. In the long term I would prefer the Element Set approach because it brings all relevant details about an element together, which I view as a very practical approach, with tangible benefits in improving training and enhancing the record creation process. For example, the sources of information are listed in detail with each element (instead of in the preamble), along with the recording guidelines, and with related elements like "Source Consulted". Newly added (I don't recall seeing these the last time I looked) are links to the MARC21 encoding fields for these elements (and the main RDA text doesn't have these direct links to MARC21). Each element should include the method of inputting, which the ONIX document has. Right now we're stuck with the various MARC conventions, as opposed to the simpler element approach in ONIX and RDA. For example, for Title of Person, ONIX has "<TitlesBeforeNames>" and "<TitlesAfterNames>" and RDA has "Title of the Person." The MARC21 encoding points to web pages for all the bibliographic (100, 700, 800) and authority (100, 400, 500) fields, through which was one has to sift to find the delimiter ($c) and associated punctuation, then refer back to the content standard for the choices that are made for the element. The status quo with AACR2-MARC is the strange standard, and the most random and time-consuming way of cataloging. The Element Set View in ONIX and RDA is quite rational, streamlined and systematic in comparison. Adding the business case for each element is an excellent idea in an Element Set View. In looking at the ONIX entries for each element, the business cases often focus on sales and inventory control, but mostly they just restate the user task objectives in RDA in different words. For example, the ONIX business case for recording "large print" is "Visually-impaired consumers need accurate information on large print", which is basically the Select user task objective in RDA for this element ("select a resource that is appropriate to the user's requirements with respect to the physical characteristics of the carrier"). Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
