>Mike McReynolds wrote: "Browsing a catalog of jumbled records does not seem >like a desirable exercise for users."
The University of Chicago Library now has nearly 7,000 active RDA bibliographic records in our catalog. While 7,000 may seem like a lot (and it probably is in the context of the total population of RDA records right now), it is a miniscule fraction of the overall database in which they reside. Our catalog has over 6 million bibliographic records and is approaching 10 million holdings, reflecting a plethora of historical cataloging rules, practices, policies, metadata schema, and (still) evolving cooperative cataloging guidelines. So I have to agree with Benjamin...hybridity is a given, not an option. If my math is correct (admittedly, not my strong suit), these RDA records currently amount to only 0.0011% of our total database. So statistically, it is probably close to impossible for any one person to even find themselves in a position of browsing through "jumbled records" in any given list of search results in our catalog. Modifying 6,000,000 records to look like 7,000 records doesn't seem logical, let alone practical, and so we feel we can afford a certain amount of patience at this transitional juncture, as we see how things play out at the national level, before modifying anything (either AACR2 or RDA) at the local level. When it comes to the integration of RDA records with AACR2 ones, the lack of GMDs in RDA seems to get a lot of attention on this list. There are valid and shared concerns here, too, for users who may be accustomed to seeing GMDs display in the traditional Horizon OPAC (not our "next-gen" Aquabrowser interface), and using those GMDs to make decisions on what resources to access. But this concern is also put in the context of the fact that we don't expect to have either of these two catalog interfaces in their present form after 2012 (we are a build-partner for Kuali-OLE). So we are generally undergoing a process of assessing how we want data to be delivered to and used by patrons. Our future catalogs will not consist of MARC records alone (our Aquabrowser interface already doesn't, actually). Our data will come from a variety of sources beyond MARC, most all of which (Dublin Core records, TEI data, EAD files, library Web pages, geospatial data, and the like) do not have GMDs either, but their metadata may indicate content types and carrier types in other, equally valid and important ways. Of the 6 million MARC bibs we have, only 1.3 million (22%) even have a 245$h GMD populated. GMDs were a means to and end (a selectively-applied, not consistently-applied means, I would add), not the end itself. Going forward, we feel no particular impetus to tie ourselves to that specific data construct by adding GMDs to RDA records. Rather, we are looking at managing the broader spectrum of data that indicate content and carrier types across all resources and their varied metadata. Within this context, GMDs do not represent the common bar we need to set. I think at this stage, if we were going to consider any kind of "retrospective conversion" of existing MARC records at Chicago, (a) I wouldn't even call it that because of the historical baggage it carries, and (b) it would not be done solely at the local level, but perhaps as a result of policies that eventually get developed for master records in OCLC (which may allow is to update local records via OCLC Bibliographic Record Notification). And again, we recognize that it may take some time for such policies to be developed and implemented. Over the years, we have focused efforts to take advantage of working at the cooperative/network level, not the local level; adopting RDA will only strengthen, not reverse, that approach at Chicago. --Chris. ___________________________________________ Christopher Cronin Director of Metadata & Cataloging Services University of Chicago Library 1100 E. 57th Street Chicago, IL 60637 Phone: 773-702-8739 Fax: 773-702-3016 Skype: christopher-cronin E-mail: cron...@uchicago.edu<mailto:cron...@uchicago.edu> ___________________________________________ From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]<mailto:[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA]> On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:40 PM To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA<mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records? I would just point out that, for most if not all of us, a hybrid catalog is already the norm. For example, plenty of pre-AACR2 records persist (particularly for serials) in our catalog as in LC's and the like. Here at MIT we are just at the beginning of the process of thinking about how we will handle RDA records, assuming LC decides to adopt the code; we have about 80 of them already in the OPAC, and have not heard any outcry from our users. Retrospective conversion is something we are very unlikely to consider. Benjamin Abrahamse Cataloging Coordinator Acquisitions, Metadata and Enterprise Systems MIT Libraries 617-253-7137 From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access [mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca]<mailto:[mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca]> On Behalf Of Mike McReynolds Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:55 PM To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca<mailto:RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca> Subject: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records? Assuming that many of the members of the list are going to be using RDA for future records, I am interested in knowing what people are planning for their existing records? Browsing a catalog of jumbled records does not seem like a desirable exercise for users, but the extreme cost in time and money to convert existing to RDA doesn't seem feasible. Will the existing bib records be found in newer FRBR/RDA catalogs without being converted? Thank you for any observations you may have concerning how you are going to handle your existing records. Mike McReynolds Cataloging / ILL Librarian Shook, Hardy & Bacon Law Library Kansas City mmcreyno...@falconflight.com<mailto:mmcreyno...@falconflight.com>
