Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records (was: Browse and search BNB open data)
Karen said:
It is easy to find records for translations that do not have a uniform
title for the original.
Our smaller clients strongly object to a 240 for translations,
particularly if the foreign language text is not on the title page;
they say it confuses patrons. We change the 240 to to 246 3
$iTranslation of:$a. They accept 240 for classical music and
Shakespeare, but little else.
There is also the case in Canada of simultaneous publications in English
and French. There is no way of know which is a translation of the other.
Don't assume failure on the part of the cataloguer; it may be patron
desire. Patron convenience seems to be the forgotten factor in much
or our discussions.
My preference would be address the problem though systems, rather than
changing records, e.g., to have 240s suppressed in display and
hitlists, but that would remove 240s from classical music and
Shakespeare as well.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records (was: Browse and search BNB open data) (fwd)
I said:
Our smaller clients strongly object to a 240 for translations ...
I should have added they are not very fond of 130s either,
particularly when the 130 says (motion picture) and the 245 says
[videorecording]. They say patrons see it as a contradiction.
They will accept 130s for Bible, and we've had no complaints about
Arabian nights.
There seems to be a gap between those who make these decisions, and
the resulting experience of many library users. RDA seems even further
removed than AACR2, since it does not address display.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__
Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records (was: Browse and search BNB open data)
Quoting J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca: Don't assume failure on the part of the cataloguer; it may be patron desire. Patron convenience seems to be the forgotten factor in much or our discussions. Not only do I not assume failure on the part of the cataloguer, I don't assume failure at all. But the fact is that we can only work with the data we have in our bibliographic records regardless of what data *possibilities* there are in the MARC record. I believe this is indisputable. My preference would be address the problem though systems, rather than changing records, e.g., to have 240s suppressed in display and hitlists, but that would remove 240s from classical music and Shakespeare as well. It's not rocket science to keep 240's in music records, as long as they are coded as music records, and drop them from text records. It's not even rocket science to display uniform titles for items with multiple Expressions. There are a lot of possibilities, but for these possibilities to become realities we have to get the data out of MARC in into a more manipulable format. These things are a pain to do with our current data, but I think they become much more plausible with a format that is less based on the structure of the display and more on the meaning of the data. In fact, the RDA elements, as defined, are closer to this concept of manipulable data elements than MARC is. That's not to say that RDA is perfect as a cataloging code, but it is based on more modern data concepts than AACR/MARC was. kc -- Karen Coyle kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet
Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records (was: Browse and search BNB open data)
On 8/5/11 at 2:16 PM, Karen Coyle wrote in part: But the fact is that we can only work with the data we have in our bibliographic records regardless of what data *possibilities* there are in the MARC record. I believe this is indisputable. I like this. I just hope that this indisputable fact begins to register with the admin folk who make budget and staffing decisions - - often, it seems to me, they ignore the simple fact that if no one creates metadata, then the shiny discovery interface only appears to be aiding our patrons because it's built over a shallow/poor resource. We should talk much less (in other professional areas) about baseline/standard records and more about enriched and quality records. Daniel -- Daniel CannCasciato Head of Cataloging Central Washington University Brooks Library Ellensburg, WA We offer solid services that people need, and we do so wearing sensible shoes. -- MT
