RDA Update and Next Steps: What you Need to Know€¦ · or they came in as RDA copy catalogingor they came in as RDA copy cataloging Total of 2,826 RDA authority records: 2,8,8 010

RDA Update and Next Steps: What you Need to Know

G d P ti f G t O tGood Practices for Great Outcomes: Cataloging Efficiencies that Make a Difference

Christopher CroninDirector Metadata and Cataloging ServicesDirector, Metadata and Cataloging Services

27 September 2011

Discussion Points

Recommendations fromRecommendations from the U.S. RDA Test

RDA @ UChicago

Current National Post‐TestRDA Activities

Next Steps for UChicago

Impact on Future of Metadata Infrastructures dand

Next Steps for You

Christopher Cronin © 2011

Formal Testing InstitutionsLibrary of Congress Columbia University North Carolina State University

Graduate Schools of Library andNational Agricultural Library

Graduate Schools of Library and Information Science (GSLIS) Group

North East School District, TX

National Library of Medicine Douglas County Libraries, CO Northeastern University

Backstage Library Works Emory University OCLC Contract Cataloging Services

Brigham Young University George Washington University Ohio State University

Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh Minnesota Historical Society Online Audio‐Visual Catalogers (OLAC)

University of Chicago Morgan Library and Museum, NYC State Library of Pennsylvania

Clark Art Institute Library University of North Dakota Quality Books

College Center for Library Automation, FL

Music Library Association Stanford University


FLy y

Recommendations from the TestLC/NLM/NAL: implementation no

sooner than January 2013

JSC: rewrite (i.e., reword) RDA in clear, plain English; define process for

updating RDA in an online environment

PCC: address authority control issues; plan trainingupdating R A in an online environment

ALA Publishing: improve Toolkit functionality; provide complete RDA LC: Begin transition to a functionality; provide complete RDA

record examples

gMARC replacement

Vendors: move beyond MARC;Vendors: move beyond MARC; develop better displays and

functionality of data; support new ways of cataloging/data input.


Plan for Rewording RDA

Not rewrite, rewordRDA C bli h hi i dit t dd RDA Co-publishers hiring a copy editor to address issues identified by RDA testers: Wordiness Complicated language and style Redundancy Sentence structures that result in multiple interpretations

Deadline of June 2012 for reworded Chapters 6, 9, 10, 11, & 17, for review by U.S. RDA Test Committee and11, & 17, for review by U.S. RDA Test Committee and JSC

http://www.rdatoolkit.org/sites/default/files/rda_copy_editor_charge__v10.pdf


Transforming our Bibliographic Framework

Transforming our Bibliographic Framework: A Statement from the Library of Congress (May 13, 2011):

Determine how to evolve current encoding standardsE i t ith S ti W b d li k d d t t h l i Experiment with Semantic Web and linked data technologies

Foster maximum re-use of library metadata in the broader Web Enable users to navigate relationships among entitiesg p g Explore how to display data beyond MARC-based systems Identify the risks of action and inaction Bring existing metadata into new bibliographic systems

http://www loc gov/marc/transition/


http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/

PCC RDA Task Forces

Final Reports: http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/RDA-Task-p p g pGroups.html PCC RDA-Decisions-Needed Task Group PCC Task Group on Hybrid Bibliographic Records PCC Task Group on Hybrid Bibliographic Records PCC Task Group on AACR2 & RDA Acceptable Heading

Categories H di t t d d AACR2 d lid d RDA th f Headings constructed under AACR2 and valid under RDA, therefore usable as-is;

Headings constructed under AACR2, in need of change to be used as valid RDA headings;as valid RDA headings;

Gray areas, where the need for change is uncertain.


AACR2 & RDA Acceptable Heading Categories

Analysis of AACR2 Authority Records:

g

7,631,000 (95.1%) = 1XX fields that can be used under RDA without further modification.

172 000 (2 1%) = 1XX fields that can be used after one or 172,000 (2.1%) = 1XX fields that can be used after one or more of the mechanical operations described in the report.

225 000 (2 8%) = 1XX fields that may contain elements not 225,000 (2.8%) 1XX fields that may contain elements not provided for under RDA, or whose 1XX fields may lack information believed to be essential under RDA. These authority records must be reviewed and upgraded beforeauthority records must be reviewed and upgraded before their 1XX fields can be used under RDA.


RDA @ UChicago


UChicago Demographics

18 Original Catalogers:5 M hi C t l i 5 Monographic Cataloging

3 East Asian Collection Cataloging (Mono and Serials) 2 Law Cataloging (Monos and Serials)2 Law Cataloging (Monos and Serials) 1 Serials Cataloging 1 Map Collection Catalogingp g g 1 Rare Books Cataloging 1 Digital Collections (non-MARC) Metadata 2 Interns/Practicum students 2 Department/Section heads


UChicago’s Test Production Statistics

Total Original Bibliographic Records 1301

Monographs 637

Maps 598

Serials 23

Sound Recordings 19

Mixed Materials 10

Vi l M t i l 8Visual Materials 8

Integrating Resources 5

Computer Files 1Computer Files 1

Total Authority Records 1202

Total Dublin Core Records 20


RDA in the UChicago Catalog

As of September 15, 2011:= .00176% of the whole

database

Total of 10,616 RDA bibliographic records: 6,517 = original RDA records created by

UChiUChicago 4,099 = records we changed from AACR2 to RDA ,

or they came in as RDA copy catalogingor they came in as RDA copy cataloging Total of 2,826 RDA authority records: 2,810 are UChicago NACO records,8 0 a e UC cago CO eco ds Quarterly automated authorities processing will

add more RDA records in the future


Implementation Philosophy

Involve all catalogers from all cataloging operations Minimize local exceptions. Added only six RDAMinimize local exceptions. Added only six RDA

elements to our “UChicago Core”: Other Title Information (RDA 2.3.4): Core for monos; cataloger’s

judgment for serials and integrating resourcesjudgment for serials and integrating resources Copyright Date (RDA 2.11): Core for monos; cataloger’s

judgment for serials and integrating resources ISSN of Series (RDA 2.12.8)( ) ISSN of Subseries (RDA 2.12.16) Media Type (RDA 3.2) Source Consulted (RDA 29.6)( )

Give preference to cataloger’s judgment over broad policy decisions for every scenario


Training (1)

• Conceptual model around which RDA is d i d

FRBRdesigned

• FRBR for Non‐Catalogers: Thi Y Sh ld K

(Functional Requirements

f Things You Should Know but Were Afraid to Ask (http://www loc gov/today/cyberlc

for Bibliographic Records) (http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc

/feature_wdesc.php?rec=4554)Records)


Training (2)

LC’ “T i th T i ”• LC’s “Train the Trainer” (http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/)

• JSC RDA PresentationsRDA & JSC RDA Presentations (http://www.rda‐jsc.org/rdapresentations.html)

ALA T lkit W bi

RDA & RDA

• ALA Toolkit Webinars (http://www.rdatoolkit.org/training)

• Supplement training withToolkit Supplement training with local decisions


Local Policy Development

Decide who to involve in policy developmentC f C Core RDA elements for LC: LC Core (http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/core_elements.html)

Useful LC documents on RDA options/alternatives:Useful LC documents on RDA options/alternatives: Alternatives, optional omissions, and optional additions

(http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/RDA_alternatives.doc) Instructions referring to decisions by the "agency creating the Instructions referring to decisions by the agency creating the

data" or "agency preparing the description“ (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/RDA_agency.doc)

Instructions using wording "or" to refer to choices for the same Instructions using wording or to refer to choices for the same situation (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/RDAtest/RDA_ or_decisions.doc)


Impact on ILS Systems

RDA in MARC: Summary of Additions (htt // l / /RDAi MARC29 ht l)(http://www.loc.gov/marc/RDAinMARC29.html) New fields to replace GMD

N fi ld t d tt ib t f New fields to encode attributes of names, works, and expressionsN $i d fi d i Bibli hi 7XX d 76X New $i defined in Bibliographic 7XX and 76X-78X and in Authority 4XX and 5XX for relationships between resourcesrelationships between resources.

ILS vendor interviews: http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog


GMD “replaced” by 3 new elements

Content type (MARC 336)

Media type (MARC 337)

Carrier type (MARC 338)(MARC 336)

• performed music

(MARC 337)• audio• computer

(MARC 338)• computer disc• microfilm reel

• spoken word• still image• text

p• microform• unmediated

• online resource• volume

• text


33X Display with New Labels


Impact on Authority Control

New RDA fields in authority records New RDA fields in authority records Field of activity; Affiliation; Occupation; Gender; suite

of fields for musical works (e.g., Form of work; ( g , ;Medium of performance; Key)

Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) Post g p g g ( )RDA-Test Guidelines (http://www.loc.gov/catdir/pcc/PCC-Post-RDA-

)Test.html)


Impact on Vended Processes & Products

Authority control processing Backstage Library Works:

http://ac.bslw.com/community/blog/tag/rda/ LTI statement on RDA:

http://www.authoritycontrol.com/NEWSNOTES ht lS.html

Purchased MARC records Outsourced cataloging


Impact on Acquisitions

OCLC policy statement on RDA Cataloging in WorldCat for the U.S. testing period and beyond g p y(http://www.oclc.org/rda/policy.htm)

Impact on “fast cat” processes?


Impact on Copy Cataloging

Large impact on copy cataloging documentation g p py g gand training in the long term Accept copy as-is? All of the time? Some of the

?time? Correct poor RDA copy (e.g., coded RDA but missing

core elements)?core elements)? RDA-ify upgradeable AACR2 records? All of the above?


Costs

RDA Pricing: http://www.rdatoolkit.org/pricing Toolkit: sliding scale based on number of users Print loose-leaf: $150

Updates will be distributed in PDF Costs of updates “will be Updates will be distributed in PDF. Costs of updates will be determined based on the size and scope of the update, from free for a minor update to a fee for larger updates.”

St ffi C t Staffing Costs: Different for every institution See next slide for estimated costs at UChicago See next slide for estimated costs at UChicago


Est. Prep/Training/Meeting Time

Prepare ILS for RDA fields: 5 hours total Create test records for the system: 20 30 hours total Create test records for the system: 20-30 hours total Implement record displays: 10 hours total Review LC/PCC documentation and make local policy

d i i 10 h 13 ldecisions: 10 hours x 13 people Misc. FRBR / RDA Toolkit training: 5 hours x 42 people Initial RDA training: 8 hours x 42 people Library-wide presentation: 1 hour x 60 people + 5 hours prep Regular meetings of testers (Aug-Dec): 15 hours x 15 people NACO/BIBCO “refresher”: 2 hours x 15 peopleNACO/BIBCO refresher : 2 hours x 15 people Post-test policy revision and development: ???? User testing: ????


Next Steps for UChicago

Build an assessment program for RDA dataf C Potential user testing of: reproductions; Content, Media and

Carrier Types; RDA data for music resources; relationships between RDA data and our faceted catalog interface

Evaluate impact on authorities processing and DBM generally

f O Evaluate impact on systems design for Kuali-OLE (http://www.kuali.org/ole)

Continuing learning about Semantic Web linked data Continuing learning about Semantic Web, linked data, alternatives to MARC Formats


Future of Metadata Infrastructures

Transition out of MARC: Impact of LC’s Transforming our Bibliographic Framework

effort Transition from record-based metadata to linked data Transition from record-based metadata to linked data Impact on OCLC products, services Impact on ILS vendor systemsp y Impact on training needs Impact on staffing and required skill sets

Before adopting RDA, adopt a culture supporting continual and iterative change


Next Steps for You?

Experiences of RDA testers to be published in upcoming theme issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterlytheme issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterly

Understand the impact of increased RDA copy cataloging records on your library’s processes andcataloging records on your library s processes and databases

Make 2012 your library’s “Year for RDA-Readiness”;Make 2012 your library s Year for RDA Readiness ; commit to your own professional development Get out of the FRBR/RDA “holding pattern” – learn them!

Follow LC-lead effort to transition out of MARC

Semantic Web and linked data


Thank you!

Christopher [email protected]@ g

Documents

RDA Update and Next Steps: What you Need to Know€¦ · or they came in as RDA copy catalogingor they came in as RDA copy cataloging Total of 2,826 RDA authority records: 2,8,8 010