> -----Original Message----- > From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: November 15, 2011 8:38 PM > To: Brenndorfer, Thomas > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] "Computer" media type carriers > > > Thomas said: > > >"Online resource" is already defined as something not on a localized > >physical carrier, but still requiring a "computer" Intermediation Tool > >to access the content. > > The original question was, what carrier term is there for a localized > physical electronic resource carrier? >
There seem to be different problems here that have different solutions. "Carrier term" in RDA is a very broad categorization of material, roughly parallel to 007/01 values. The lists for computer carriers are essentially the same in both RDA and MARC, with "other" being the catchall category for anything that doesn't fall into either of those lists. "Online resource" is already mapped in MARC in a 007/01 value, as well as more recently in a 008/23 value (where it is made distinct from a "direct electronic" form-- for "disc, tape, playaway device, flashdrive, portable hard drive, etc."). However, even MARC points out that all of these "electronic" forms are intended for "manipulation by a computer" and not for "items that do not require the use of a computer (e.g., music compact discs, videodiscs)". (from http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd008b.html ). A more specific term can be used in the Extent element. It's interesting that in AACR2 9.5B1, "computer" is suggested as a qualifier for new terms used for any new direct access physical carriers. RDA 3.4.1.5 only says to use a term in "common usage". The Library of Congress Policy Statement for 3.4.1.5 outlines the process of how new terms will be tracked, distributed, and presented as proposals to the JSC. For something like e-books loaded onto an e-book reader, I would take an entirely different approach. The Kobos we lend with pre-loaded titles are cataloged as the same class of material as our watt-meters and birding binoculars-- they're objects. The pre-loaded titles are treated the same as any analytical titles bound in a larger volume-- content notes and/or access points (we use access points). >From an RDA perspective, the relationship between the e-books and the e-book >reader is what should be emphasized. As analytical titles, the "contains" >relationship designator would be used, but I would take this a step further >and develop an "installed on/has installed" reciprocal relationship. This is >difficult to do in MARC because only the work and/or expression would be >mapped in the relationship to the hardware. We've managed a crude way of doing >this, though, through a feature in our system that flags the material type >after the title in the Title Browse index (similar to a GMD in fact). There wouldn't be manifestation details for the e-books in a catalog record for each e-book as installed on the reader. Elements like Extent wouldn't mean much on a device that can alter font size and change what "pages" mean on the fly. Metadata about each title would likely be on the device itself (and not really required in any separate catalog record for each e-book as installed). The system specification for the device may be on the record for the e-book reader itself, which would likely be sufficient to convey physical details about how the e-books are manifested on the device. Ultimately, a better encoding system than MARC would show the reciprocal relationships in a catalog by letting people find the e-book readers, see the works/expressions installed, and then let them navigate to records of the works (and then further let them see all the other manifestations held by the library for those works), or by finding each work and having the relationship ("installed on") shown to them so they can find the e-book reader and then obtain it. Thomas Brenndorfer Guelph Public Library
