[RDA-L] Request Direction to a Sample RDA Record

[Randi Tywoniuk]

Hello all,

I am an extreme neophyte when it comes to RDA. I don't perform much cataloguing 
and when I do it is mostly copy cataloguing. I have not run into any records, 
as of yet, that look different than the AACR2 convention that I have become 
familiar with. Can someone point me to an RDA record within an OPAC? Perhaps if 
I see an RDA record in an OPAC I can "begin" to follow the thread of 
converting/not converting AACR2 records. If so, I much appreciate it. Please 
email me off list.

Thanks,

Randi Tywoniuk (tywon...@crnbc.ca), Circulation Desk
Education Services and Communication
College of Registered Nurses of British Columbia
2855 Arbutus Street
Vancouver, B.C.  V6J 3Y8
Tel: 604 736-7331, ext 118 Fax: 604 738-2272 Toll-free: 1 800 565-6505 (within 
Canada)
www.crnbc.ca
Protecting the public by effectively regulating registered nurses and nurse 
practitioners


This message is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or 
otherwise exempt from disclosure. Any other distribution, copying or disclosure 
is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this message in error, please immediately reply to the 
sender and delete this information from your computer. All CRNBC e-mail is 
routinely scanned and filtered for viruses. For further information contact 
postmas...@crnbc.ca. Thank you.

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[J. McRee Elrod]

Benjamin accurately said:

>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 (parti=
>cularly for serials) in our catalog as in LC's and the like.

The differences between the red and green books, AACR1, and AACR2
records were not as dramatic as those between AACR and RDA.  I doubt
if many patrons notice 2d vs., 2nd, ill. vs. illus., nor ISBD
punctuation.  Spelled out abbreviations is a greater change.  There
were no main entry changes for monographs as dramatic as the dropping
of the rule of three.

For me, the most difficult earlier change was entry for serials and
series.  I had spent years with "Journal of chemistry" being entered
under title, and "Journal of the Chemical Association" being entered
under the association.  But that pales in comparison with the end of
GMD, unjustified added entries, no standard for number of authors to
be transcribed or traced, no defined standard for title
capitalization, no indication of typos in situ, imprint place
jurisdiction not being supplied if lacking, and *long* phrases
replacing ISBD inclusions.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[Kathleen Lamantia]

Thank you, Mac, these are great!

Kathleen F. Lamantia, MLIS
Technical Services Librarian
Stark County District Library
715 Market Avenue North
Canton, OH 44702
330-458-2723
klaman...@starklibrary.org
Inspiring Ideas ∙ Enriching Lives ∙ Creating Community
The Stark County District Library is a winner of the National Medal for library 
service, is one of the best 100 libraries in the U.S. according to the HAPLR 
rating, and is a Library Journal 5 Star library. 

 


-Original Message-
From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:05 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

29 April 2011

EXPORT OF RDA RECORDS TO BE AACR2 COMPATIBLE  


If 040$e is "rda"

Export with "a" at the beginning of RSN.

Leave LDR/18 as "i"

Remove 040$erda

Remove  if present 100/110/600/610/700/710$e,
"$4, including $2 if following, leaving concluding period.
These terms are not at present being applied, ecept for illustrators of
children's books.

for example 700 1  $aJones, Jim,$d1930-1999,$eactor. 
becomes 700 1  $aJones, Jim,$d1930-1999.


Create a 245$h[compound gmd] composed of 338$a : 336$a, e.g., [online
resource : text].  Do not include $2.


If 008/35-37 is fre, 336-338 are French.  Substitute English [online
resource : text] in 245$h.

Do not create a 245$h for [volume : text].

If more than one $aterm in either 338 or 336, separate those terms
by comma-space.  Separate 338 and 336 by space-colon-space.

[SLC changes repeating 336-338 fields to repeating $a in one field.]


Shorten some 336 terms when exported as 245$h:


336 Content type

cartographic dataset }
cartographic image   }  
cartographic moving image} [export as "cartographic"]
cartographic tactile image   }
cartographic tactile three-dimensional form  } 
cartographic three-dimensional form  }
  
tactile image}
tactile music} [export "tactile"]
tactile notated movement }
tactile text }
 actile three-dimensional form   }

three-dimensional form   [export "form"]

three-dimensional moving image   }[export as "moving image"]
two-dimensional moving image } 




Export 250 "edition" as "ed."

In 260$a, using this list, abbreviate jurisdiction, whether in square
brackets or not.  NB: only abbreviate if not adjacent to $a, e.g.,
$aVictoria, British Columbia becomes "Victoria, B.C.", but $aMelbourne, 
Victoria becomes "Melbourne, Vic."

[SLC continues to supply missing jurisdictions, but spelled out.]


Alabama   Ala.
AlaskaAlaska
Alberta   Alta.
Arizona   Ariz.
Arkansas  Ark.  
Australian Capital Territory  A.C.T.

Briitish Columbia B.C.

CaliforniaCalif.
Colorado  Colo.
Connecticut   Conn.   
  
Delaware  Del.
District of Columbia  D.C.
Distrito Federal  D.F.

England   Eng.

Florida   Fla.

Georgia   Ga.

HawaiiHawaii

Idaho Idaho
Illinois  Ill.   
Indiana   Ind.
Iowa  Iowa   

KansasKan.
Kentucky  Ky.

Louisiana La.

Maine Me.
Manitoba  Man.   
Mayland   Md.
Massachusett  Mass.
Michigan  Mich.
Minnesota Minn.
Mississippi   Miss.
Missouri  Mo.
Montana   Mont.
  
Nebraska  Neb.
NevadaNev.
New Brunswick N.B.  
New Hampshire N.H.
New JerseyN.J.
New MexicoN.M.
New South Wales   N.S.W.
New York  N.Y.
New Zealand   N.Z.
Newfounland   Nfld.
Newfoundland and LaboradorN.L. 
North CarolinaN.C.
North Dakota  N.D.
Northern TerritoryN.T.  
Northwest Territories N.W.T.
Nova Scotia   N.S.

Ohio  Ohio
Oklahoma  Okla.
Ontario   Ont.
OregonOr.
  
Pennsylvania  Pa.
Prince Edward Island  P.E.I.
Puerto Rico   

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[Benjamin A Abrahamse]

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] On Behalf Of Mike McReynolds
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 12:55 PM
To: 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

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for RDA implementation

[J. McRee Elrod]

Mike McReynolds said:

>Thank you for your ideas.  I can see you've anguished over this 
>transition too!

Anguished is the right word.

There are some provisions of RDA which we will not adopt in original
cataloguing, and edit in derived records.

RDA directs that International Standard Bibliographic (ISBD) brief
Latin abbreviation inclusions be dropped for long  phrases in the
"language of the catalogue".  SLC, when the publisher is not known,
rather than inserting  260$b[publisher not identified], [editeur non
identified], [Verlag nicht identifiziert], or [chuban shang meiyou
queding] (depending on the language of the client's catalogue*) as
directed by RDA, will continue to insert the ISBD abbreviation
260$b[s.n.].  With our international customer base, we feel this is
necessary.  This will not affect the electronic publishers and
aggrigators among our clients, since we know who published their
titles.

RDA omits jurisdiction from the imprint if not on the item.  We will
continue to supply it, e.g., 260  $aLondon [Ontario].

We will not allow unjustified added entries.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__


*In addition, some clients have more than one language of the
catalogue.  A library in Geneva is French/German/English.  What
language would we use for inclusions a a record for a Spanish title?

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[J. McRee Elrod]

Edit (great name!) asked:

>Do you upload records converting to AACR2 format for now that we are not
>sure we'll be implementing RDA

We are fortunate to so far have derived no RDA records.  We tend to
catalogue less usual material.

>Or are you planning on continue doing this even when all the
>libraries start to implement RDA?

We will upload RDA unchanged to bibliographic utilities.  Whether
clients receive RDA unchanged, or exported as AACR2 compatible, will
be the choice of each client.  In our database, it will be unchanged
RDA.

Whether and when we begin original cataloguing in RDA will depend on
if/when a client requests RDA.  We would not want to create records
according to different sets of rules, so all original records would be
created in RDA once any client wants them.

What is export for us, would be import for an individual library, of
course.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[J. McRee Elrod]

Mike McReynolds asked:

>  ... are going to be using RDA for future records, I am interested
>  in knowing what people are planning for their existing records?

We developed a database walk to change existing records, being posted
separately (due to length).  But we doubt we will use it.  Instead we
plan to offer an export of RDA records to be more like AACR2 ones.  
That export is also being posted separately.

We agree with you absolutely that the mix is a terrible disservice to
patrons.

LC (unofficially), LAC, and OCLC all tell us they have no plans to do
retrospective change.  In the case of OCLC, they point out that new
clients will join in the future with legacy records.

If no changes are made to legacy ACR2 or new RDA records, at *least* a
mapping change should be made to display AACR2 245$h along with RDA
338 : 336 ahead of other data, in the absene of icons substituted for
both.


   __   __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   / Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[J. McRee Elrod]

29 April 2011

EXPORT OF RDA RECORDS TO BE AACR2 COMPATIBLE  


If 040$e is "rda"

Export with "a" at the beginning of RSN.

Leave LDR/18 as "i"

Remove 040$erda

Remove  if present 100/110/600/610/700/710$e,
"$4, including $2 if following, leaving concluding period.
These terms are not at present being applied, ecept for illustrators of
children's books.

for example 700 1  $aJones, Jim,$d1930-1999,$eactor. 
becomes 700 1  $aJones, Jim,$d1930-1999.


Create a 245$h[compound gmd] composed of 338$a : 336$a, e.g., [online
resource : text].  Do not include $2.


If 008/35-37 is fre, 336-338 are French.  Substitute English [online
resource : text] in 245$h.

Do not create a 245$h for [volume : text].

If more than one $aterm in either 338 or 336, separate those terms
by comma-space.  Separate 338 and 336 by space-colon-space.

[SLC changes repeating 336-338 fields to repeating $a in one field.]


Shorten some 336 terms when exported as 245$h:


336 Content type

cartographic dataset }
cartographic image   }  
cartographic moving image} [export as "cartographic"]
cartographic tactile image   }
cartographic tactile three-dimensional form  } 
cartographic three-dimensional form  }
  
tactile image}
tactile music} [export "tactile"]
tactile notated movement }
tactile text }
 actile three-dimensional form   }

three-dimensional form   [export "form"]

three-dimensional moving image   }[export as "moving image"]
two-dimensional moving image } 




Export 250 "edition" as "ed."

In 260$a, using this list, abbreviate jurisdiction, whether in square
brackets or not.  NB: only abbreviate if not adjacent to $a, e.g.,
$aVictoria, British Columbia becomes "Victoria, B.C.", but $aMelbourne, 
Victoria becomes "Melbourne, Vic."

[SLC continues to supply missing jurisdictions, but spelled out.]


Alabama   Ala.
AlaskaAlaska
Alberta   Alta.
Arizona   Ariz.
Arkansas  Ark.  
Australian Capital Territory  A.C.T.

Briitish Columbia B.C.

CaliforniaCalif.
Colorado  Colo.
Connecticut   Conn.   
  
Delaware  Del.
District of Columbia  D.C.
Distrito Federal  D.F.

England   Eng.

Florida   Fla.

Georgia   Ga.

HawaiiHawaii

Idaho Idaho
Illinois  Ill.   
Indiana   Ind.
Iowa  Iowa   

KansasKan.
Kentucky  Ky.

Louisiana La.

Maine Me.
Manitoba  Man.   
Mayland   Md.
Massachusett  Mass.
Michigan  Mich.
Minnesota Minn.
Mississippi   Miss.
Missouri  Mo.
Montana   Mont.
  
Nebraska  Neb.
NevadaNev.
New Brunswick N.B.  
New Hampshire N.H.
New JerseyN.J.
New MexicoN.M.
New South Wales   N.S.W.
New York  N.Y.
New Zealand   N.Z.
Newfounland   Nfld.
Newfoundland and LaboradorN.L. 
North CarolinaN.C.
North Dakota  N.D.
Northern TerritoryN.T.  
Northwest Territories N.W.T.
Nova Scotia   N.S.

Ohio  Ohio
Oklahoma  Okla.
Ontario   Ont.
OregonOr.
  
Pennsylvania  Pa.
Prince Edward Island  P.E.I.
Puerto Rico   P.R.

QuebecQue.
QueenslandQld. 

Rhode Island  R.I.
Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic  R.S.F.S.R.

Saskatchewan Sask.
South Australia  S. Aust.
South Carolina   S.C.
South Dakota S.D.

Tasmania Tas.
TennesseeTenn.
TexasTex.

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics  U.S.S.R.
United Kingdom   U.K.
United StatesU.S.
Utah Utah

Vermont  Vt.
Victoria Vic.
Virgin Islands   V.I

Re: [RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[J. McRee Elrod]

RDA Global Walk 6 May 2011

These changes to legacy AACR2 records would make them more like RDA,
but perhaps better to export RDA records to be more like AACR2?

I. RDA entry and descriptive changes
 
In 040 insert $beng (if $bfre not present); add $erda

In LDR/18 substitute "i" for "a"

In 100/600/700$d change "b." to hyphen after date; "d." to hyphen before
date; "fl." to "active".

In 130/630/730 remove '$pN.T.' and '$pO.T.' from between 'Bible' and 
$p.   Spell out as 'New Testament' and 'Old Testament' if not
followed by $p and the name of a book.

In 130/630/730 replace "Koran" with "Qur'an".

If 245 contains "[et al.]", change 1st 700 to 100, and 245 1st indicator
to '1'.  [Cutters will only be changed if the record is reused.]

In 250 change "ed." to "edition."' "Rev." to "Revised"
  [Even though item may have "ed.]

In 260$c replace "c" with copyright sign.

In 300 spell out 'p.' and 'pp.' as 'pages'; 'v.' as 'volume' if '1', 'volumes'
if a number higher than 1 or a blank; 'ill.' and 'illus.' as
'illustrations'.

If 008/24-27 contains 'z', remove $k and following fields from
110/610/710s.  If no 110, change 1st 710 to 110, and 245 1st indicator to
'1'.

In 110/610/710 Change "Dept." to "Department".
 
In 500 and 504 change "p." and "pp." to "pages"; "v." to "volume".




II. RDA/MARC21 336-338 added and 245$h removed


If LDR/07 = a or s; 008/23 = s, o or q: Remove 245$helectronic resource]
Add 336 $atext$2rdaontent
337 $aelectronic$2isbdmedia
338 $aonline resource$2rdacarrier
Subsitute 300 "electronic text" for "online resource"
Leave 300 "CD-ROM"

If LDR/07 = i; 008/23 = s o, or q: Remove 245$helectronic resource]
Add 336 $atext$2rdaontent
337 $aelectronic$2isbdmedia
338 $aonline resource$2rdacarrier
Subsitute 300 "website" for "online resource"
Leave 300 "CD-ROM"


If LDR/06 = g, 008/23 = v, 007/02 = f:
Remove 245$h[video recording]
Add 336 $atwo-dimensional moving image$2rdaontent
337 $avideo$2rdamedia
338 $avideocassette$2rdacarrier


If LDR/06 = g, 008/23 = v, 007/01 = d:
Remove 245$h[video recording]
Add 336 $atwo-dimensional moving image$2rdaontent
337 $avideo$2rdamedia
338 $avideodisc$2rdacarrier

If LDR/06 = j, 007/01 = d
Remove 245$h[sound recording]
Add 336 $aperformed music$2rdaontent
337 $aaudio$2rdamedia
338 $aaudio disc$2rdacarrier

If LDR/06 = i, 007/01 = d
Remove 245$h[sound recording]
Add 336 $aspoken word$2rdaontent
337 $aaudio$2rdamedia
338 $aaudio disc$2rdacarrier

[RDA-L] Plans for Existing Bib Records?

[Mike McReynolds]

  
  

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

  

Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] Upper case in records

[Stephen Hearn]

Maybe this is obvious, but just in case--

RDA Appendix A refers to capitalizing words. The examples make it clear that
"capitalize" does not mean "write in all upper case." It means to
differentiate the letters of a word by writing one or more in uppercase,
usually just the first letter. When all the letters in a word are
uppercased, e.g., for an acronym, RDA capitalization is about
differentiating the letters of this word from others in the expression.
Assuming this reading is correct, then any title to be transcribed which
uses all upper case letters of uniform size and style cannot really have its
capitalization transcribed, because it shows no capitalization as defined by
RDA. If there are typographic differences of size or style in the letters of
a title to be transcribed, then using upper and lower case to represent that
differentiation would be in accordance with RDA's instructions for
capitalization, even for a title using no lowercase letters.

Correct?

Stephen

On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 6:09 AM, Adger Williams wrote:

> My speed of reading is decreased by enough that I can observe myself
> reading instead of just knowing what the words are without thought.  It took
> several attempts to recognize the word "TURBERVILLE."  "HANKINS" was hard
> too.  "JOHN" was easy; it's short and it has all that space around the "O".
>
> "All-capital print greatly retards speed of reading in comparison with
> lower-case type. Also, most readers judge all capitals to be less legible.
> Faster reading of the lower-case print is due to the characteristic word
> forms furnished by this type. This permits reading by word units, while all
> capitals tend to be read letter by letter. Furthermore, since all-capital
> printing takes at least one-third more space than lower case, more fixation
> pauses are required for reading the same amount of material. The use of all
> capitals should be dispensed with in every printing situation" from: Tinker,
> Miles A. (1963). *Legibility of Print*. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University
> Press. p. 65. 
> ISBN
>  6316674 .
>
> If you wish to investigate further, check out the Wikkipedia entry on
> All-caps, the section on readability, (from which the above quote was taken)
> for further discussion.
>
> For further corroboration, it might be worthwhile to look at literature on
> fonts or studies of the mechanisms of reading.
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Beacom, Matthew 
> wrote:
>
>> To read the full text of a 2 or 3 hundred page monograph printed in all
>> caps would be tiresome.  However, a line or two in a bibliographic record is
>> not much trouble to read or access.
>>
>>
>>
>> On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being “I can see that some text is in mixed case
>> and other text is in all caps, but there’s no effect on my ability to read
>> it or otherwise have access to the information” and 10 being “I can’t read
>> the all cap text at all, so my ability to read it is zero and as a result I
>> am denied access to this resource” what is the difference in readability or
>> accessibility in the following display?
>>
>>
>>
>> I’d give this a 1.
>>
>>
>>
>> Matthew Beacom
>>
>>
>>
>> *Author:*
>>
>> HANKINS, JOHN 
>> ERSKINE.
>>
>> *Title:*
>>
>> THE POEMS OF GEORGE TURBERVILE [electronic resource] / EDITED WITH
>> CRITICAL NOTES AND A STUDY OF HIS LIFE AND WORKS.
>>
>> *Published:*
>>
>> 1929
>>
>> *Description:*
>>
>> 1 online resource (712 p.)
>>
>> *Available Online:*
>>
>> Online 
>> thesis
>>
>> *Dissertation:*
>>
>> Thesis (Ph.D.)--Yale University, 1929.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
>> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Adger Williams
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 17, 2011 1:28 PM
>>
>> *To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
>> *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] Upper case in records
>>
>>
>>
>> To all who think case doesn't matter...
>>  Let me explain why I care about all upper case text.
>>
>> The Latin alphabet has letters that go "above the line" (t, d, l, b, f, h,
>> k) (also called "ascenders"), letters that go "below the line" (descenders)
>> (e.g. g, j, p, q), and letters that do neither.  With this mix of letter
>> types, words have a distinctive shape that makes them easy to recognize
>> quickly while reading.  (The literature on the exact mechanism of reading is
>> large, but image recognition figures in the process at an early stage
>> according to many.)  (The word "many" has a different shape if you will than
>> the word "more", which makes them easy to distinguish.)
>>  Those of us

Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] Upper case in records

[Adger Williams]

My speed of reading is decreased by enough that I can observe myself reading
instead of just knowing what the words are without thought.  It took several
attempts to recognize the word "TURBERVILLE."  "HANKINS" was hard too.
"JOHN" was easy; it's short and it has all that space around the "O".

"All-capital print greatly retards speed of reading in comparison with
lower-case type. Also, most readers judge all capitals to be less legible.
Faster reading of the lower-case print is due to the characteristic word
forms furnished by this type. This permits reading by word units, while all
capitals tend to be read letter by letter. Furthermore, since all-capital
printing takes at least one-third more space than lower case, more fixation
pauses are required for reading the same amount of material. The use of all
capitals should be dispensed with in every printing situation" from: Tinker,
Miles A. (1963). *Legibility of Print*. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University
Press. p. 65. 
ISBN
 6316674 .

If you wish to investigate further, check out the Wikkipedia entry on
All-caps, the section on readability, (from which the above quote was taken)
for further discussion.

For further corroboration, it might be worthwhile to look at literature on
fonts or studies of the mechanisms of reading.

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Beacom, Matthew wrote:

> To read the full text of a 2 or 3 hundred page monograph printed in all
> caps would be tiresome.  However, a line or two in a bibliographic record is
> not much trouble to read or access.
>
>
>
> On a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being “I can see that some text is in mixed case
> and other text is in all caps, but there’s no effect on my ability to read
> it or otherwise have access to the information” and 10 being “I can’t read
> the all cap text at all, so my ability to read it is zero and as a result I
> am denied access to this resource” what is the difference in readability or
> accessibility in the following display?
>
>
>
> I’d give this a 1.
>
>
>
> Matthew Beacom
>
>
>
> *Author:*
>
> HANKINS, JOHN 
> ERSKINE.
>
> *Title:*
>
> THE POEMS OF GEORGE TURBERVILE [electronic resource] / EDITED WITH CRITICAL
> NOTES AND A STUDY OF HIS LIFE AND WORKS.
>
> *Published:*
>
> 1929
>
> *Description:*
>
> 1 online resource (712 p.)
>
> *Available Online:*
>
> Online 
> thesis
>
> *Dissertation:*
>
> Thesis (Ph.D.)--Yale University, 1929.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Adger Williams
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 17, 2011 1:28 PM
>
> *To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> *Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] Upper case in records
>
>
>
> To all who think case doesn't matter...
>  Let me explain why I care about all upper case text.
>
> The Latin alphabet has letters that go "above the line" (t, d, l, b, f, h,
> k) (also called "ascenders"), letters that go "below the line" (descenders)
> (e.g. g, j, p, q), and letters that do neither.  With this mix of letter
> types, words have a distinctive shape that makes them easy to recognize
> quickly while reading.  (The literature on the exact mechanism of reading is
> large, but image recognition figures in the process at an early stage
> according to many.)  (The word "many" has a different shape if you will than
> the word "more", which makes them easy to distinguish.)
>  Those of us with poor vision find all-caps difficult to read because
> in all-caps, there are no more differences between ascenders, descenders,
> and regular letters.  This wipes out differences in word shape, and makes
> the process of reading more arduous than necessary.
>
>For me, it's an annoyance.  If I turn my head sideways, I can read
> whatever I need to with some time and a good magnifying glass.  But there
> are people who are worse off than me, who would appreciate, I feel sure,
> having no extra difficulties put in their way.
>
> In short, it's not just a matter of aesthetics for everyone.  Apologies for
> the extended explanation, but it keeps coming up as a matter of taste
> instead of as a matter of access.
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Beacom, Matthew 
> wrote:
>
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> I’ve tested both thesentencecase and Microsoft Word. They do the same
> thing.
>
>
>
> I find the substitutions by these programs unsuccessful.  They just
> exchange one set of errors in capitalization for another. I’m left thinking
> the difficulty with all caps (or all lower case, or title case, or etc.) is
> a matter of taste. (These records are not coded 

Re: [RDA-L] [ACAT] Upper case in records

[James Weinheimer]

On 05/17/2011 10:43 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:

Yeah, if RDA _required_ all capital titles, that might be bad.  I 
don't think anyone thinks all capital titles are preferable.


But in the actual real world eco-system, where we're often going to be 
harvesting data from other sources rather than creating it ourselves 
from -- and not going to have time to individually review and fix each 
record -- and that's the environment we're going to be in like it or 
not (and it's got some positives, that environment) -- it does not 
seem a bad choice to me to ALLOW you to take titles in the 
capitalization they are provided in.


It certainly does not seem disastrous.  Certainly if any catalogers do 
have the time to fix those before or once the record is in a 
cooperative cataloging store, that would be a service to the rest of 
us.  Nobody is arguing that they like all-capital titles.



Jonathan points to the exact problem: we are supposed to be "harvesting 
data" from other sources rather than creating it for ourselves, *and* 
not review and edit each record individually. I agree that we absolutely 
must do this, but something highly important is assumed here: that the 
information in the records you are harvesting is of *sufficient 
quality*. When an experienced cataloger sees a record such as have been 
mentioned here--all caps, when *no standard* allows it: not ONIX, not 
AACR2 or any previous library cataloging rules, no citation guides, or 
anything else that I am aware of, the cataloger immediately become 
suspicious. In the past, there has been a great deal of variation 
allowed in these standards just as there are in in the library catalog: 
I remember seeing cards that were in all lower case except for the first 
word. It made German look very strange. I even found an example: 
http://tinyurl.com/67vt5z6**(I don't know if this was Princeton specific 
or not, but probably not, but obviously a Taylorist procedure, just as 
the RDA acceptance of all caps also betrays a Taylorist mentality) Also, 
using all caps for acquisitions records provided (still provides) 
information in itself: BEWARE! This is an order record!). The major 
variation in all of these methods is Title case, which seems to be 
followed in most of the citation guides, but no bibliographic standard I 
have seen allows all caps.


So, the experienced cataloger will look at a record with this kind of 
absolutely elementary error and immediately think: "What else is wrong 
with this stinky record?" because if the elementary part is so obviously 
bad, what about the parts that really are difficult?


I agree that our records must interoperate with other metadata records 
on the web, and harvesting is certainly one way to do it, although the 
methods will vary. Ultimately though, the methods don't matter: the 
records must work coherently with the others and the idea of data 
standardization in some sense becomes unavoidable. It seems to me that a 
record in all caps provides a clear indication that it *does not follow 
any standards at all* and if we want our standardized records to 
interoperate with these other records in a coherent way, editing will be 
unavoidable if we want to provide some level of standards (which I think 
is absolutely vital). Otherwise, we just throw up our hands, harvest any 
kind of junk that comes our way and hang the consequences both to 
ourselves and our patrons. We wouldn't stand for something like this in 
our water: "Well, only have of the wells have typhoid," or that only 50% 
of the rubber that goes into making the tires on our cars is reliable.


How can we try to resolve this in the real world? By trying *very hard* 
to coordinate metadata creators into following some basic, minimum 
levels of shared standards. Otherwise, I see the only option as chaos 
and when there are no standards the only remaining choice is probably 
the Google/Yahoo/Bing/etc. algorithmic solutions. The one thing, and the 
one thing only, that catalogers can provide to automatically-created 
metadata records is standardization. If that is not seen as important, 
it seems that we might as well throw away our cataloging manuals and 
look for other jobs.


Apologies for being so gloomy.

--
James L. Weinheimer  weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com
First Thus: http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
Cooperative Cataloging Rules: http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/