evin M Randall
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 11:50 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Titles of nobility
Mary Mastraccio wrote:
> I hope that rather than changing your practice, the Anglo-American
> practice will change to your practice--as in having the dates in a s
Heidrun wrote:
up to now, there is no text string "Wiesenmüller,
Heidrun, 1968-" in the authority record for my own person. Instead, the
relevant fields look like this:
100 Wiesenmüller, Heidrun
548 1968 $4 datl
The code "datl" makes it clear that this is a year of birth (there are
other code
Yes this is a US/UK convention issue. I remember years ago, in another life, we
had a British woman reviewing manuscripts and she made all sorts of punctuation
edits and we had to go back to re-edit it so it matched the punctuation for the
Philippines, which followed US convention.
Mary L. Mas
I understood the question to be about making 240 obsolete. Are you suggesting
that 240 be made obsolete but use 246 instead of 700?
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and
Agree that it would be better to always use 7xx.
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On
I agree that Work and Expression is too fine a hair to split.
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BA
Based on what our customers request, it depends on what the local system
requires. Some systems require a GMD (245$h)-- of these customers some ask that
we retain the 245$h, even if they are getting RDA conversion. Other customers
ask us to generate a GMD (245$h) if it does not exist and there i
e: [RDA-L] Difference between Introduction and Preface
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.
Judy Kuhagen
JSC Secretary
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Mary Mastraccio
Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
Sometimes I think RDA makes too many distinctions. It would be far more
sensible to have only one relationship designator covering writers of things
like prefaces, introductions, forewords and afterwords. Then we wouldn't have
to wreck our brains about the differences
m-11:30m at the McCormick Place,
room S 103bc. Here is the agenda:
Content Outline:
* Lori Robare, University of Oregon Libraries. RDA: What's In It for You?
* Mary Mastraccio, Manager, Cataloging and Authorities, MARCIVE, Inc. RDA with
Less Stress
* Richard Guajardo, University of Ho
Richard Moore wrote:
>When time permits, it would be useful if LCSH authorities for fictitious
characters could be cancelled, and re-established as RDA authorities in
the name authority file. This would avoid having two separate authority
records for the same entity, each using a different form as
Chris,
You are correct that making global RDA changes to existing records can only be
done in an automated way. As far as the descriptive fields, I think libraries
are generally planning on accepting hybrid catalogs. However, there are tools
and services to automate changes and some libraries
Kathie Goldfarb wrote:
Until the 3xx can format a GMD, it is our plan to add them manually. Luckily,
our library does not add a lot of media. Ebook bulk loads will need to be
edited, but hopefully, a way will be found to do that in bulk.
I have seen several libraries in different forums mention
Heidrun Wiesenmüller asked regarding serial records:
What are your feelings about first vs. latest issue
- which advantages and disadvantages do you see? If you were free to
choose, i.e. if there was no existing data to consider, and if we assume
(for the sake of the argument) that both method
when I look at the LC distributed records there are two patterns
$a $b $c $d $e including $a $b $c $d $e $d
and
$a $b $e $c $d
I don't think I have ever seen the $e before the $b but there certainly isn't
any consistency about $e coming before or after $c ; if it comes at the
end--after $c/d t
Mac Elrod wrote:
Certainly having 040$e in a consistent position would be good. Having
it last, in alphabetical order, we find easier to spot than between
other subfields (after either $a or $b). I don't look forward to
having to redo all our RDA Procedures and programs to allow for
variation in
Gene Fieg asked:
will all of the companies that do authority work, will they give us a free
review of our entire files once authority records are "rda"ed?
The answer of course is "It depends". I cannot speak for other companies but I
suspect it is similar. Any library that has a Notification su
The Cataloging & Metadata Management Section invites you to a forum on
reimaging the library catalog.
CaMMS Forum
When: Friday, June 22, 2012 - 1:30 to 3:30pm Pacific Daylight Time*
Location:Anaheim Convention Center, Room 209B
Online https://www1.gotomeeting.com/registe
I tried BROWSE and had the same results so there is something else that is
kicking some of us out.
Mary L. Mastraccio
ALA-ALCTS-CaMMS Chair
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78265
1-800-531-7678
From: Resource Description and Acce
You aren't blind, you just aren't able to get past the guest logon screen. I've
tried several times with different browsers and most of the time I when I
submit a search it sends be back to the guest logon screen. However, twice I
did retrieve a list of titles and there are MARC ISBD options on
The Margaret Mann Citation Award Jury is looking for nominations of individuals
that have contributed to the library cataloging & classification community.
http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/alcts/awards/profrecognition/margaretmann.cfm
I have submitted Adam Schiff as a nomination but in order to
David Powell asked:
I've seen more than one PCC record now that purports to be an RDA record that
nevertheless leaves in the |p N.T. or |p O.T. in the 630 for biblical entries.
I was under the impression that these subfields were to be eliminated in RDA.
Just wondering what I might be missing...
Adger Williams wrote:
Those ...with poor vision find all-caps difficult to read
Mac Elrod wrote:
I would think either sentence or title capitalization, even with the occasional
error in lower casing an acronym or name, would be better for at least 245,
246, and 740. than all caps.
Even people
^^
> Adam L. Schiff
> Principal Cataloger
> University of Washington Libraries
> Box 352900
> Seattle, WA 98195-2900
> (206) 543-8409
> (206) 685-8782 fax
> asch...@u.washington.edu
> http://faculty.washington.edu/~aschiff
> ~~~
John Attig wrote:
> I have indicated my intention of making such a proposal to
> the PCC, and they have indicated their willingness to include
> such a proposal in their consideration of possible changes to
> NACO practice when/if RDA is implemented.
There are many necessary changes that have b
AMEN!
I'm glad to hear this discussion because the problem is far too common.
Fortunately PCC/NACO/SACO people are on this list because this needs to be
addressed by the people creating rules & guidelines and training the
participants.
Related to the issue of re-assigning numbers (I love Karen
> My guess is there are other rules that I haven't spotted yet,
> but these three--DCM Z1 008/32, NACO Heading Comparison, and
> RDA/LCPS--would need to change to correct the current practice.
The desire to have the UndifPNA practice/records changed has been expressed
repeatedly over the years.
It isn't a case of either/or. Linked data is very economical, so should be
used, but that doesn't mean local data has to be fully dependent on/linked to
off-site data. Ideally the local system will periodically update/refresh the
local copy of the official data it is using to link to locally. As
Agreed, details should not be added to bib records when the additional data is
in an authority record. However, it is important to push system designers to
use that data properly or it won't be accessible the way we imagine it. The
same way keyword searching doesn't find alternate terms/names in
I don't think the problem is with the rule, the problem is with systems that
don't provide easy options to refine a search. Someone might want to see more
than books authored by a president and they would expect to find it when
searching for materials written by (author)...
Yes, I'm sure many p
Jonathan Rochkind wrote re. linking 490/830 fields:
> I can make the public discovery service I write make use of
> it -- but there's no point in spending time on that if no
> records are going to.
> Indeed it is a vicious circle. But writing software to make
> use of it
> is in fact a LOT
What troubles me is the focus on incidentals (often misinterpreted) and not
main issues.
The original post said
"Thanks in advance for all information (and potential public drubbing of CGU?)."
So, although I agree it wasn't necessary to say, ("NYPL would like to
politicize it"), it was certainl
Karen Coyle wrote:
> To be sure, I am not at all convinced that RDA has the
> necessary emphasis on DATA -- it seems to be heavily oriented
> toward the use of text strings. I have an issue with creating
> strings like "356 pages", not because of the change from "p."
> to "pages" but because th
Karen Coyle wrote:
> I was rather surprised to
> see some titles presented in all upper case...
> Is this truly RDA compliant? Anyone know?
I cannot speak for RDA--I suspect it doesn't care--but some time ago (June
2010, I think) LC announced that it will be "re-purposing" publisher data
provi
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> [The 300$a v.] makes sense for printing catalog cards. It makes no sense
> at all in an electronic record that will never become a printed catalog
> card... does it?
Actually, the a major use of MARC records was to produce cards and libraries
still have cards print
I'm sure LC/NACO, etc. have thought about this. However, when I asked about any
thinking on this--obviously authority records have to be functional in either
environment (which means catalogers take whichever is the current term no
matter which set of cataloging rules you follow)--the response I
Our instructions has the password.
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio Texas 78265
1-800-531-7678
ma...@marcive.com
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac
Diane Hillmann wrote:
> I'm not sure that we should continue to "hold on" to the idea of typing
> in tables of contents (or buying them from vendors who then refuse to
> let us share them). In a world where digital versions of books are
> taking hold, and Amazon has made "Look Inside the Book" the
Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>I'm curious ... that no cataloger in Germany actually deals directly in
> MARC, while in the US catalogers seem to think there is no way possible
> BUT dealing in MARC, to the extent that some have argued on this list that
> there is no better way possible to refer to data
> Mary Mastraccio wrote:
> >
> > It might be determined that the "Works" field in the parent
> record
> > should only have the control number of the child name record... I
strongly suspect that
> the
> > various language translations of a title could/
Owen Stephen:
> I think that in this case I am talking about a weakness in MARC21 rather
> than AACR2. Possibly it is the implementation - but isn't MARC21 an
> implementation of MARC?
MM: At one level MARC21 is an implementation of MARC but what I am thinking
of is the library systems implementat
Mary Mastraccio wrote:
>
> > ..[modifications in] the construction of authority data
> > for automated management are long overdue. Too much of the data and
> rules > > are designed for human intervention. ... A name authority record
should have as much data as > possib
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
> Just one more thing: To achieve what you envision, it will I think have
> to be a top priority that authority data (names and subject headings)
> become openly and freely available for easy inclusion and swift use in
> metadata.
Jim Weinheimer wrote:
>"I think another c
>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 7:52 AM
> To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Variant series titles in RDA
>
> Jenifer Marquardt wrote:
> >
>
> > If such destructive headings
> > are transfered to bibliographic records the damage is extended to
> > everyone's bibliographic fi
Sorry for that personal message that went to the list.
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
MARCIVE, Inc.
P.O. Box 47508
San Antonio Texas 78265-7508
1-800-531-7678
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
oint stuff, can
> you let me know where you posted them? Thank a million.
>
> I am sitting here in an outfit every piece of which was
> purchased in San Antonio. It seems fitting for today since
> it will be hot and humid as all get out here.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Arlene
>
Sorry for failing to include the date for the ACIG--FRAD meeting.
It is Sunday, June 29. The program will be over about 4:30, followed
immediately by an ACIG business meeting for those interested.
Mary L. Mastraccio
Cataloging & Authorities Librarian
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio Texas 78265
1-800-53
With all the discussion about what is involved with FRAD some might be
interested in this program at ALA.
1:30-4:30 p.m. LITA-ALCTS/CCS /ACIG - The Authority Control Interest Group
ACC -- Room 210 A-C
You Know FRBR, But Have You Ever Met FRAD
Track: Collection Management & Technical Services; C
Nicholas Bennyhoff wrote:
> While I can see value for the patron in the inclusion of
> gender, it isn't always as clear cut a question as is usually assumed.
>
> There are authors in the GLBT community who do not identify
> as either gender, and in fact identify themselves as either
> between gen
Mac Elrod wrote:
> If we wish to simplify our practices in the interests of
> "interoperability", the need would seem to be to remove
> redundant MARC fixed fields from authority and bibliographic
> records,...
>
> I'm finding it difficult to imagine why the gender of an
> author is relevant to t
Hal Cain wrote:
> I like Mac Elrod's notion of using simply (Scripture) as a
> qualifier; I would also like to leave as many titles as possible totally
> unqualified.
>
> I would apply the same reasoning to scriptures of other communities.
> One further, related point that's independent of the f
Hal,
I agree with your observation that users search for the short title
"Genesis" not "Bible--O.T.--Genesis". When I worked in theological libraries
we made sure our subfield $p was indexable for that very reason. I like your
suggestions of using the direct form and qualifying the titles "Genes
cess point", "Main entry" is "Primary access
point", and "Uniform title" is "Citation".
Mary Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78233-5367
1-800-531-7678
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tunately this
can also be corrected to a 440, no 830.
Mary Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78233-5367
1-800-531-7678
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
ot; or "circa", I have never
seen one that says "approximately". My reasoning (these two forms of
abbreviation are used outside the library/cataloging environment) may not be
sufficient reason to continue the practice, and I certainly don't feel
strongly about the issue, but it is
that
comes up.
Mary Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78233-5367
1-800-531-7678
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
uld all agree to just leave it as is.
However, if the intention is to encourage display terms that catalog users
are more likely to understand then that is a different discussion.
Mary Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78233-5367
1-800-531-7678
ate as much as possible this is one instance where for simplicity sake
I would go with the first option of leaving the indicator codes and display
constant phrases as is but recommending the use of "blank" and a subfield $i
with appropriate phrase.
Mary Mastraccio, MLS
Cataloging & Authorities Manager
MARCIVE, Inc.
San Antonio, TX 78233-5367
1-800-531-7678
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
58 matches
Mail list logo
