Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

Am 20.12.2013 14:32, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: We are talking about the level of the work here. The title of the manifestation is, of course, always recorded in the respective manifestation element. But you know that we had non of that casuistry in our rules? And for reasons that had been d

Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

Am 20.12.2013 13:37, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: I think the interesting point to note is that not everything which consists of several works by the same person is in fact a "compilation of works". Rather, in the case of... This is the sort of casuistry we've never envied AACR users for. Let

Re: [RDA-L] Some more examples of qualified conventional collective titles

Adam L. Schiff wrote: ... none of these collections was treated as being known under its own title. ... Nicephorus, $c Blemmydes, $d 1197-1272. $t Works. $k Selections (Oeuvres theologiques) Rupert, $c of Deutz, $d approximately 1075-1129. $t Works. $k Selections (Opera apologetica) Talmage,

Re: [RDA-L] 6.2.2.10 and 6.27.1.9

16.12.2013 23:39, John Hostage: We need to be able to enter data in MARC fields without punctuation and let the punctuation be generated as necessary on output. The punctuation could even differ in different contexts. (We can dream, can't we?) This dream has long since been reality in non-MA

Re: [RDA-L] Bodleian/OLIS RDA materials

12.12.2013 15:28, Bernadette O'Reilly: The Bodleian Libraries and Oxford Library Information System are pleased to be able to make their inhouse RDA documentation publicly available at http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/our-work/cataloguing. It includes brief transfer training materials for experienc

Re: [RDA-L] Automatically adding relationship designators (was Cost of Retrospective Conversion for Legacy Data...)

12.12.2013 14:07, James Weinheimer: ... still remains unproven, or the question of how much implementing FRBR/RDA will ultimately cost. The costs are already beyond many libraries. Not just the cost of implementing but even the costs of just reading the rules. Therefore, we are heading into a

Re: [RDA-L] Access to the knowledge of cataloging

06.12.2013 09:12, James Weinheimer: I do believe that FRBR is "the main enemy" (to use your term). Why? Because everything, including RDA and the new formats, etc. all state explicitly that this is what they are aiming for, even though the model has never been proven to be what people want. Why

Re: [RDA-L] Access to the knowledge of cataloging

05.12.2013 10:29, James Weinheimer: Whether we like it or whether we don't, libraries are not the main places where people go to for their information needs. When was the last time you saw in a movie or TV show that when someone needed information, they were told: Go to a library and ask a libra

Re: [RDA-L] Access to the knowledge of cataloging

04.12.2013 21:07, Laurence S. Creider: If I were a business or business group thinking about adopting a new standard and had a choice between the costs of RDA and a community standard that was largely open, I probably would not choose RDA even if it were markedly superior to the other standard.

[RDA-L] Access to the knowledge of cataloging

03.12.2013 21:58, Cindy Wolff: "Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change in communication formats, but not in rules." This is what I have been thinking about for a while as I read these discussions: What if we gave a standard and nobody

Re: [RDA-L] RDA imprint revision

27.11.2013 07:01, J. McRee Elrod: Resources may be manufactured or distributed without being published, just as they may be produced without being published. We should not stretch the meaning of "publish" beyond all reason. On the other hand, might not "to publish" in actual fact be reason

Re: [RDA-L] RDA Toolkit Price Change

Am 23.11.2013 17:55, schrieb Melissa Powell: ... There is no 'choice', the rules have changed. They *got* changed. This is the first step to compliance with the rest of the information industry. Really? Has anyone out there in the industry even noticed? What *might* get noticed is a change

Re: [RDA-L] Corporate body main entry

28.10.2013 20:02, J. McRee Elrod: > >> OTOH, this sort of issue may have long since become a non-issue when >> it comes to searching. The "main entry" idea is obsolete ... > > The main entry concept is not obsolete (despite the name change) so > long as we are Cuttering, creating subject and added

Re: [RDA-L] Corporate bodies as creators: festschrift, corporate brochure a.s.o.

28.10.2013 10:08, Heidrun Wiesenmüller: The German community will need to learn to cope with this new freedom. It won't be easy ;-) But worse, it won't be better than what we used to have. "Freedom" has a misleading positive connotation about it for these matters. We have a conflict with "equ

Re: [RDA-L] Corporate bodies as creators: festschrift, corporate brochure a.s.o.

28.10.2013 09:11, Heidrun Wiesenmüller: RAK has a rule which is similar (yet not identical) to RDA's idea of corporate bodies which are "responsible for originating, issuing, or causing to be issued". The definition in RAK is: "a corporate body which has either prepared *or* initiated and edited

Re: [RDA-L] RDA 6.2.2.10

08.10.2013 15:20, Adger Williams: For collocation purposes, there should eventually be other methods than text strings anyway. Namely, and ideally, a link to a work record. Then, it would become immaterial what kind of verbal designation we add to it to become intelligible for the human reader.

Re: [RDA-L] RDA 6.2.2.10

Am 08.10.2013 08:27, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: Could we perhaps solve these problems by clearly distinguishing between the title of the work on the one hand and the mechanism for collocation on the other? There should be no excuse to record in a title field something that is not a title. T

Re: [RDA-L] WEMI and Bibframe

Am 02.10.2013 01:55, schrieb J. McRee Elrod: ISBD is the most successful international library standard ever, and a major component of the hoped for UBC. It is sad to see it sidetracked. We don't know if the last word on that has been spoken yet. Right now, lacking any proof-of-concept and re

Re: [RDA-L] Uniform titles in RDA

25.09.2013 17:44, Jack Wu: ... after some length of time, will the rule become the alternative again, and the alternative again become the rule? Will East and West, in this case, English and German, ever meet? No wonder there are endless change proposals and endless updating. Try as I might,

Re: [RDA-L] Uniform titles in RDA

24.09.2013 13:01, Danskin, Alan: ... JSC recognised that the omission of the article is not good practice because the resulting title does not accurately represent the resource and (more importantly) may render the title ungrammatical in inflected languages. That antiquated omission rule was a

[RDA-L] Business case and evaluation

21.08.2013 12:30, James L Weinheimer: When I have mentioned that it was necessary to make sense of the RDA project in practical terms, or in other words, make a business case, it was obviously deemed unnecessary. What's necessary, nonetheless and all the more, will be evaluations, done by thir

Re: [RDA-L] Illustration terms in 7.15.1.3

20.08.2013 15:07, Mitchell, Michael: The fact that RDA rules create a conundrum like this regarding what should be a simple line of description has got to be one of the most ridiculous examples of why this whole set of rules will be just another (big) nail in our professional coffins. The public

Re: [RDA-L] Difference between Introduction and Preface

05.08.2013 16:04, JSC Secretary: You can choose the higher-level designator "writer of supplementary textual content" if you don't want to or cannot identify a more specific relationship. This leaves me wondering whether or not the relationship designators are a D aspect or (also) an A aspect.

Re: [RDA-L] ] The "A" in RDA

31.07.2013 00:04, James Weinheimer: ... The refusal to accept that 99% of people do not fit into these little pre-conceived FRBR user tasks is why I think that perhaps librarianship may be destined for extinction. We must free our minds from these pre-conceptions! Visions of doom for librari

Re: [RDA-L] ] The "A" in RDA

29.07.2013 8:53, Tillett, Barbara: RDA is about describing bibliographic resources and their relationships and enabling access to those resources to meet our users needs. It is intended to be used as an online tool that can be consulted as needed once a cataloger has learned the basics. That

Re: [RDA-L] The "A" in RDA

29.07.2013 13:51, James L Weinheimer On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Bernhard Eversberg wrote: With catalogs and cataloging, the journey is not the destination nor its own reward or half the fun, as Confucian thinking may have it, but there's no desire for a journey,

Re: [RDA-L] The "A" in RDA

29.07.2013 00:10, Karen Coyle: > This may be out of date, because I found it on a 2010 license [1], but > it says: > > "GRANT OF LICENSE > ... Such bibliographic records and > metadata may display DDC numbers, but shall not display DDC captions;" > > This is from WebDewey, and I don't have any

Re: [RDA-L] Bibframe

28.05.2013 23:45, J. McRee Elrod: Angelina Joseph asked: Every now and then I see the word "Bibframe" in emails. Is it replacing MAR= C? How is that going to be? You will have answers from those more in the loop than I, but there is my *very* biased answer. Bibframe is a work in progress, so

Re: [RDA-L] Transcription and spacing

28.05.2013 08:28, Heidrun Wiesenmüller: The other day, we were discussing the rules for transcription in 1.7. We wondered how exact an exact transcription has to be according to the standard rule of RDA. When it says "as it appears on the source", does this also refer to spacing? There is one exp

Re: [RDA-L] Cambridge University RDA materials

15.05.2013 14:44, C.J. Carty: The Cambridge RDA Steering Group is pleased to announce that it is making available all of its RDA documentation and training materials under a Creative Commons CC-BY licence for anyone to reuse or adapt. Our intranet is not publicly accessible so we have created a s

Re: [RDA-L] Hole part description

01.05.2013 05:18, J. McRee Elrod: What I object to is the assumption that it's the /only legitimate way of doing it. ... the title of the whole and the title of the part are not even stored in the same record ... We are not fond of 245$a$p. To me, the UKMARK 248 was a FAR better way of doin

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters no. 19: Library Catalogs and Information Architecture

Am 05.04.2013 11:21, schrieb James Weinheimer: Unfortunately, the cataloging community has its hands full trying to deal with the changes of RDA. And most of the time, it is about the D in RDA, whereas it is the A that matters by far the most. Only the A relates to, literally as well as metaph

Re: [RDA-L] FW: RDA Implementation at the British Library

Am 02.04.2013 14:00, schrieb Danskin, Alan: From the 1^st April 2013/, RDA : Resource Description and Access /, replaced the /Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules/, 2^nd edition, as the British Library’s official descriptive cataloguing standard, for records added to the

Re: [RDA-L] "Most appropriate language" (RDA 1.4)

Am 25.03.2013 13:30, schrieb Paul Davey: ... I do apologise to be mentioning a MARC subfield, which I don't think purists like, but it's useful shorthand; also not to give the RDA rule number, but I don't have access to the Toolkit, but I'm sure readers will know what I mean) "... no access to

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

Am 21.03.2013 12:01, schrieb Elizabeth O'Keefe: Is part of the problem that we use published versus unpublished as a dividing line for textual material but not for other types of material? Well, apart from the difficulty of drawing it, the Lubetzkian question has to be asked: Is this dividing

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

20.03.2013 15:49, Laurence S. Creider: Second, I agree that the notion of publication needs reconsideration in light of a longer consideration of the history of the book from ancient times until now. I do not think that "anything fit for public reception" is a workable definition. For our pur

Re: [RDA-L] "a" rather than "t" for ETD

19.03.2013 21:58, J. McRee Elrod: Theses are produced in one or a very few number of copies, without editorial review or peer review in the same way that published monographs are made. .. For consistency we should consider electronic theses as published. That print ones are not is a fiction

Re: [RDA-L] Terminology

04.03.2013 13:40, schrieb Rita Albrecht: Question 1 == Is there a difference between "record" and "transcribe" and if so, which one? Examples: RDA 1.4: "Record the elements ..." RDA 1.7.3: "Transcribe punctuation as ..." "To record" is a very general term and says no more than "erfass

Re: [RDA-L] ISBD Area 0 content terms

Am 27.02.2013 07:49, schrieb J. McRee Elrod: MARC recently added $2isbdmeda as a source code, allow the use of "electronic" rather than "computer" as a media term. MARC also added $2isbdcontent as a source code. You might like to take a look at ISBD Area 0 content terms. They are shoter, easie

Re: [RDA-L] German cataloging rules "RAK"

Am 05.02.2013 09:49, schrieb Armin Stephan: In my view it's a tragedy for the development of cataloging, that the makers of RDA are forced to consider the possibility of "scenario 1" because of the existence of a huge number of flat bibliographic records and systems. This kind of cataloging i

Re: [RDA-L] German cataloging rules "RAK"

04.02.2013 18:42, Charles Croissant: One caveat: I learned after publication via a German review that the example I gave of a "Stuecktitelaufnahme" was flawed. If I recollect correctly, the problem was that in the situation I described, the presence of a common title would have led under RAK to

Re: [RDA-L] AW: [RDA-L] German cataloging rules "RAK"

Am 04.02.2013 13:27, schrieb Frodl, Christine: ... However, the Committee for > Library Standards, a consortium of large academic libraries and > regional networks of the Federal Republic and of one representative > from each of the Austrian and Swiss library systems, the German > public librari

Re: [RDA-L] German cataloging rules "RAK"

Am 02.02.2013 21:26, schrieb Ed Jones: I think technology offers an excellent opportunity for translating RAK into English. What might once have been a challenge can now be accomplished by dividing the work among interested parties and making use of freely available tools. As an experiment, I

Re: [RDA-L] When will RDA truly arrive? Will it truly arrive?

22.01.2013 13:41, Danskin, Alan: Richard is right. We are at the tipping point. This year, British Library, Library of Congress, Library and Archives Canada, National Library of Australia and Deutsche Nationalbibliothek will all implement RDA. Other UK legal deposit libraries are also prepar

Re: [RDA-L] Sources of information for other title information

Am 19.12.2012 09:29, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: Phew, one really must read RDA *very* carefully...! Three or four questions: 1. What about the "rewording"? Does it reduce the amount of necessary exegesis? 2. Based on the fact that next to no one will have all the time it would take

Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced

26.11.2012 17:08, James Weinheimer: .. an interesting question: Has Dublin Core failed? While it certainly can't be claimed a success, it has been folded into other initiatives, e.g. OAI and RDFa. Yet it has not been taken up by many organizations. Although having been the aim of the project:

Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced

26.11.2012 12:17, James Weinheimer: Let's face it: the FRBR structure is bizarre and difficult even for trained catalogers to grasp. ... and to apply consistently end efficiently. The FRBR user tasks are from an earlier time, and in any case, the public hasn't been able to do them since keyw

Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced

Am 26.11.2012 09:43, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: But I still find it very hard to accept that BIBFRAME in its first draft (if I understand it correctly) doesn't seem to accommodate for modeling a work in the abstract FRBR sense - at least not in the bibliographic part of BIBFRAME. Perhaps it w

Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced

24.11.2012 11:37, Heidrun Wiesenmüller: ... BIBFRAME simply _must_ be able to model RDA data in the necessary granularity and specificity. That should indeed go without saying. And besides, it ought to be integrated with RDA documentation as well, so as to enable linking in both directions.

Re: [RDA-L] Editor as main entry

Am 08.10.2012 09:38, schrieb Keith Trickey: > > The cataloguer's arrogance is part of the "main entry" concept. The > searcher approaches with catalogue with whatever information they > have - could be author or title or words from title etc. For the > searcher the information they use to access t

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

26.09.2012 14:46, Brenndorfer, Thomas: The status quo assumes we have to get main and added entries correct, and punctuation and order of elements correct, and so on, as the primary baseline to measure compliance with standards-- but this approach doesn't address what's possible with newer techn

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

Am 25.09.2012 18:16, schrieb Brenndorfer, Thomas: There is nothing simpler or more modular than: * Entity -- has several attributes (which can be used for display, naming, description, filtering, searching) * Entity can have relationship to other entities (which assists in exploring similar re

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

honesty, not proper for libraries, to use language clients may and will interpret in a wrong way and then build up wrong expectations that are bound to be disappointed. And critically thinking readers can be expected to turn it back, and then their backs, on the catalog and the library. Bernhard Eversberg

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote: > > > The qualities one would look for in finding ways to expedite retrospective > cleanup is the use of batch change tools, and good advanced search (at the > SQL level ideally) tools for catalogers. Controlled terms and codes are much

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

24.09.2012 09:47, James Weinheimer: I am a little confused. Are you saying that if people search for John Huston *as a film director* in our catalogs, they should *not* expect to find the films in which he was a director? Because it is a fact that the public will not find them after RDA is impl

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters No. 16

Am 20.09.2012 09:57, schrieb James Weinheimer: All of these considerations show more and more that RDA and FRBR are intellectual/academic constructs and divorced from the world of reality. Yes, but it is one thing to create new rules and another to get those who are supposed to comply with t

Re: [RDA-L] JSC web site: Sept. 14 additions

18.09.2012 15:55, Jack Wu: Thanks Mac, hope you're right about the rewrite. Somehow I wonder how revision and rewrite are coordinated, or are they on different tracks where they would endlessly chase each other. Jack It is, as far as we got to know, just one person doing the rewrite. Coordinati

Re: [RDA-L] Describing parts

13.09.2012 18:58, J. McRee Elrod: Bernhard said: Right, but it is one very little aspect of the deficient way multipart entities are still treated in MARC21 practice ... It is particularly frustrating in view of UKMARC's handling it so well with 248, which could have been so easily adopted

Re: [RDA-L] Regarding copyright dates for multivolume publications

12.09.2012 18:43, Jonathan Rochkind: There are a whole bunch of problems with machine actionability in these data elements -- but "seperate element for copyright date" isnt' actually one of them at all! Right, but it is one very little aspect of the deficient way multipart entities are still t

Re: [RDA-L] Location of Conference and MARC Authority 370 (fwd)

10.09.2012 21:31, Adam L. Schiff: ... It does concern me that sometimes an associated place will go in $e and other times in $f. Without clear definitions of these subfields, I don't see how a machine would know how to create an access point on the fly for display. But perhaps that isn't a

Re: [RDA-L] Naming works question

28.08.2012 19:29, Brenndorfer, Thomas: RDA has four conventions for conveying relationships between works and between expressions (relationships between manifestations and between items use all of these conventions except authorized access points): 1. identifier 2. authorized access point 3.

Re: [RDA-L] JSC, ISBD, and ISSN: harmonization discussions

20.08.2012 21:59, J. McRee Elrod: Heidrun wisely said: The ISBD has been a common core of many cataloguing codes for decades. This common ground shouldn't be >casually abandoned. VERY true. While not taking issue with the importance of ISBD as such, it can, I think, not be called a "common

Re: [RDA-L] [BIBFRAME] [RDA-L] Are RDA, MARC data, and Bibliographic concepts compatible with Relational database principles or systems? (Was: Re: [RDA-L] RDA, DBMS and RDF)

19.05.2012 03:28, Simon Spero: In the examples I gave I actually presented four different models, representing different ways of using a relational model. In all of your models, which do make things a lot clearer for those not familiar wit RDB concepts, you say nothing about subfields. Isn't i

Re: [RDA-L] [BIBFRAME] RDA, DBMS and RDF

13.05.2012 19:49, Karen Coyle: After struggling for a long time with my frustration with the difficulties of dealing with MARC, FRBR and RDA concepts in the context of data management, I have done a blog post that explains some of my thinking on the topic: http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2012/05/r

Re: [RDA-L] Card catalogue lessons

28.03.2012 21:30, Kevin M Randall: ... (I'm assuming, of course, that we'll have sensible cataloging interfaces. But that's probably a really stupid assumption to make, given how we haven't yet been able to get unstuck from a cataloging interface concept that was born in the 1960s and never

Re: [RDA-L] RDA/FRBR and the Business Case; Was:RDA as the collaboratively created way forward[?]

Am 16.03.2012 10:41, schrieb James Weinheimer: I have tried to elaborate on this in some of my podcasts. "Search" using all kinds of incredibly detailed information about you, and your friends, and their friends, and your browsing habits, and it analyses unbelievably deeply into everything you l

Re: [RDA-L] Card catalogue lessons

Am 16.03.2012 09:35, schrieb James Weinheimer: Once again, if there were evidence that it does make such a major difference to the public, that would be one thing, but there has been nothing. We are all just supposed to simply believe it. Yet, I can't believe this will make a difference to any

Re: [RDA-L] RDA Implementation Date Set

08.03.2012 22:06, J. McRee Elrod: In case you missed it: Implementation Day One Set for March 31, 2013! Here's there official announcement: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/news_rda_implementation_date.html They also published a Long Range Training Plan: http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/pdf/RD

Re: [RDA-L] Cataloging Matters Podcast, no. 14: Musings on the Linked Data Diagram

Am 02.03.2012 09:18, schrieb James Weinheimer: I would like to announce that I just made a new Cataloging Matters Podcast, no. 14: "Musings on the Linked Data Diagram". http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2012/03/cataloging-matters-podcast-no-14.html Now this piece is highly welcome and really deser

Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew

23.02.2012 01:31, Thomas Krichel: ... The poor utilization of the data in systems comes from the fact that the data is not written for the purpose of usage by systems. It is always composed with the idea that a human will read it. That's something the new "Bibliographic Framework" w

Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew

20.02.2012 20:04, Kevin M Randall: I really liked it when you said "So, perhaps the way the catalog record of the future will look to the public will be that the records won't appear at all and only the metadata creators will know that the records even exist!" I think that's exactly the same th

Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew

20.02.2012 10:03, James Weinheimer: I just posted the paper on my blog that I gave in Oslo at the Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences on Feb. 2 of this year. http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2012/02/revolution-in-our-minds-seeing-world.html Thanks for this essay which should se

Re: [RDA-L] RDA as the collaboratively created way forward[?]; was Is RDA the Only Way? An Alternative Option Through International Cooperation

On 15 Feb., Jim Weinheimer sighed: > ... really tough to reach any kind of agreement, ... Well, what are the items then that we can now regard as agreed upon? Some candidates seem to be these: 1. We have, I think, a consensus that FRBR is a refinement of ideas that have existed for a long time

Re: [RDA-L] RDA as the collaboratively created way forward[?]; was Is RDA the Only Way? An Alternative Option Through International Cooperation

Am 14.02.2012 09:58, schrieb James Weinheimer: ... and above all, free the data so that we can all discover what people really want. And free the rules as well! If we want an open standard, it needs to be open access. Besides, it must be even more difficult to make a business case for rules tha

Re: [RDA-L] RDA as the collaboratively created way forward; was Is RDA the Only Way? An Alternative Option Through International Cooperation

Am 13.02.2012 15:57, schrieb Tillett, Barbara: The US RDA Test Coordinating Committee's report of 9May2011 has a section of "Findings: Costs and Benefits," p. 105-111. You will find that report on their Web site:http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/ That will be this paper then: http:/

Re: [RDA-L] RDA as the collaboratively created way forward; was Is RDA the Only Way? An Alternative Option Through International Cooperation

Am 13.02.2012 15:33, schrieb Tillett, Barbara: Readers of this list may be interested in the various publications describing how RDA will keep us relevant in the Web environment and remind us of what is wrong with AACR2 (as repeatedly pointed out during the 1990's and since then). Relevant RDA pr

Re: [RDA-L] Considerations on Linked Data (Was: Showing birth and death dates)

28.01.2012 18:03, James Weinheimer: When I look at the famous diagram http://richard.cyganiak.de/2007/10/lod/, with dbpedia in the center of the linked data universe, it has occurred to me: what if dbpedia disappeared or started demanding money to continue operations? If it were only that. Wh

Re: [RDA-L] MARC records in a bilingual catalogue

Am 27.01.2012 22:11, schrieb J. McRee Elrod: Do the bibliographic records that SLC produces contain only internationally acceptable abbreviations or words? I should have added that for French items going to a French or French/English bilingual catalogue, we will change "map" to "carte". The

Re: [RDA-L] Some comments on the Final Report of the FRBR Working Group on Aggregates

11.01.2012 21:14, Gene Fieg: Somewhere in this thread, there was statement FRBR and RDA, whose English was muddy, to say the least. One of the most important things that can be done to RDA is to rewrite it--in the understanding that a sentence should be subject, verb, object. As it stands now,

Re: [RDA-L] Some comments on the Final Report of the FRBR Working Group on Aggregates

Am 10.01.2012 09:52, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller: I think the last part of this sentence is ample proof that there cannot be a whole/part relationship between the aggregating work (in the "glue" sense of the Working Group) and the individual works. So if we now turn our attention to the ite

Re: [RDA-L] Some comments on the Final Report of the FRBR Working Group on Aggregates

09.01.2012 23:25, Karen Coyle: And it also seems that in your scenario, aggregates link whole/part between expressions but not between works? Is there a reason why they would not link at the work? I did a very ugly diagram of this... http://kcoyle.net/temp/frbragg.pdf If it's too ugly I can t

Re: [RDA-L] Some comments on the Final Report of the FRBR Working Group on Aggregates

08.01.2012 15:24, Heidrun Wiesenmüller: Here are some more issues with the model of the Working Group, now centering on the concept of an "aggregating expression". The more I think about this, the less I understand what this entity is supposed to be in the first place, and what might be the point

[RDA-L] Dark matter (Was: Some comments on the Final Report...)

05.01.2012 23:06, Karen Coyle: this is a really devilish problem, but I think the solution is not going to be found within FRBR. That is because FRBR creates a tight coupling between W, E, and M that (IMO) does not fit the reality of publishing. Exactly. The Bibliographic Universe does not fol

Re: [RDA-L] Outcomes Inaugural Meeting EURIG

14.12.2011 22:34, Gene Fieg: There are just two pages? Stating that they had a meeting and plan for more? Considering it was a one-day meeting with, as per usual for inaugural meetings, a lot of formalia on the agenda, what more could be expected? On the "final agenda": http://www.slainte

Re: [RDA-L] "Computer" as media type redux

Am 15.11.2011 00:32, schrieb J. McRee Elrod: I'm told that "Media type is a categorization reflecting the general type of intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the content of a resource." But ... microscopic [not microscope] projected [not projector] stereographic [not stereo

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

08.11.2011 07:01, Hal Cain: However, once I began to see how competent systems handled MARC, it became plain that what they were doing was basically to create a matrix and populate it with the tag values, the indicator values, and the subfield data prefixed by the subfield code. This is only o

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

07.11.2011 10:55, Jim Weinheimer: With ISO2709, it is designed to transfer a complete catalog record from one catalog into another catalog. Yes, but Web services on any MARC based catalog need not suffer from that, Web services can be constructed without paying any att

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

Jim, my point is, in nuce: "Yes, MARC is horrible, but ISO is not the reason". You wrote: I wish that were true. ISO2709 is the standard way libraries exchange their records, and this means that anybody who wants library information must work with ISO2709. ISO2709 was designed to make catal

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

04.11.2011 21:12, James Weinheimer: Concerning "A Bibliographic Framework for the Digital Age" http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/news/framework-103111.html Also, in deference to Bernhard and his statement (ISO2709, BTW, is *not* among the flaws and issues. It is a very marginal issue of a pur

Re: [RDA-L] Offlist reactions to the LC Bibliographic Framework statement

After the new master plan had been publicized, I've had exchanges with various people about it. Mac referred to parts of this. Enthusiasm seems to be buildung up only very slowly, if at all... A plan of this caliber ought to make a real splash in the community. This is not just any old paper but

Re: [RDA-L] NISO offers itself as the standards body for future format

02.11.2011 22:06, James Weinheimer: The process for moving MARC into today's information environment is important, as noted above. Wouldn't the process be better served by utilizing the existing and open standards development processes already in place that have served our community so well in

Re: [RDA-L] Radical proposal for RDA inclusions

28.10.2011 11:00, Jim Weinheimer: Even catalogers don't work with the raw data format of MARC (don't worry. I won't begin my ISO2709 diatribe again!) but they are looking at a formatted display. Right, but the formal arrangement of the tags and elements takes nothing away from the accuracy and

Re: [RDA-L] Radical proposal for RDA inclusions

27.10.2011 19:09, James Weinheimer: On 27/10/2011 17:42, J. McRee Elrod wrote: Why not enter, for example, "[s.n]" as a code in 260$b, and have systems display "[publisher not identified]", "[editeur non identified]", "[Verlag nicht identifiziert]", "[chuban shang meiyou queding]", etc., based

Re: [RDA-L] Presentations added to the JSC website

r" will be able to make of the RDA text. Bernhard Eversberg

Re: [RDA-L] Justification of added entries

30.08.2011 23:04, Heidrun Wiesenmueller: Actually, it's been puzzling me for some time why American librarians seem to be simply putting up with the fact that an essential tool of our trade does not work with keyword searching in their systems. Shouldn't there be crowds of librarians demonstrati

Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records

08.08.2011 23:42, Kevin M Randall: I know the validity of the FRBR user tasks from my own personal experience over a lifetime, plus interactions with other people who have apparently had the same kinds of experiences over their respective lifetimes. The FRBR user tasks are: FIND - ...

Re: [RDA-L] Wording of RDA

08.08.2011 16:38, J. McRee Elrod: Since one of the conditions set by the US national libraries for implementation of RDA was rewording in simple English, why are constituent cataloguing committees still working on rule wording revisions, revisions which are often not amplifications? The communi

Re: [RDA-L] Completeness of records

08.08.2011 10:01, James Weinheimer: The Worldcat example that I gave before for searching the "work" of Cicero's "Pro Archia" http://www.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3Acicero+ti%3Apro+archia, allowing the searcher to limit by format, by other authors (editors), by date of publication, language,

[RDA-L] Get galvanized now!

If you don't feel decently galvanized yet, find stimulating stuff on the JSC website, now updated with loads of presentations, by Barbara Tillett and Judy Kuhagen. http://www.rda-jsc.org/rdapresentations.html The latest one by Judy Kuhagen should do the trick. On slides 116/116, she says *Impl

Re: [RDA-L] Browse and search BNB open data

05.08.2011 00:36, Karen Coyle: > John Attig: > Access points are treated rather strangely in RDA. The access > point is not itself an element, but is a construct made up of other > elements, which contains instructions about what and when to > include various elements in an access point. That

  1   2   3   4   >