Best Links for RDA

September 21st, 2009

If you have anything to do with Library services you know that RDA has the world all a buzz right now. But it can be difficult to keep up with everything that’s going on. For that reason, I asked our RDA Librarian to compile a list of her favorite places to get information on RDA. If you have any that you think are useful, please let us know!

Here are some links on related to RDA (Resource Description and Access), FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records), and FRAD (Functional Requirements for Authority Data) that I have found very helpful and informative.

 http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/jsc/rda.html– This is the RDA main page at the JSC website.  There are links to the full draft, background information, and much more.  The links under Scope and Principles are particularly good, especially the mapping.  Also the FAQ’s are really helpful.

 http://www.rdaonline.org/ – This site is where a demo of RDA online will be up sometime in the near future.  When I last checked it, they said they plan to have the demo ready in May.  Don’t hold your breath, but keep checking the site.

 http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/ – This is the IFLA site for FRBR

 http://www.ifla.org.sg/VII/d4/FRANAR-ConceptualModel-2ndReview.pdf  – This is the IFLA site for the draft of FRAD.

 http://www.bn.gov.ar/archivos/anexos_proyectos_especiales/encuentro/ponencias/ponencia_Patton_ingles.pdf – This paper from 2007 gives really good background on FRAD.

 http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/rdawebcasts.html  – This site has two really good presentations by Barbara Tillett of LC.  You can download the needed player from the website.  They are about an hour each, but well worth listening to.  There should be more webcasts coming up in the future so keep an eye out.

 http://courses.unt.edu/smiksa/documents/4_Hello%20RDA,%20Goodbye%20AACR2!_15April2008.pdf    -This is a great presentation.  It gives a very good overview in some detail with very understandable language.

 http://nla.gov.au/lis/stndrds/grps/acoc/documents/Walls2008.ppt – Libraries Australia have done a lot with FRBR and RDA.  This is a good presentation and at the end there are more good links.

 http://www.nelib.org/netsl/conference/2009/RickBlock.pdf – This very thorough presentation talks about RDA and MARC.  A lot of it is concatenated from other presentations, but it brings everything together nicely.

 http://www.loc.gov/marc/development.html – This has copies of the Proposals and Discussion Papers for changes to the MARC21 formats.  Just click on MARC Proposals or MARC Discussion Papers.  They are arranged by year, most recent first.  Most of the 2009 proposals and discussion papers deal with RDA elements.  Also take a look at 2008-05/1-4, as these deal with RDA too.  You may also gain insights by looking at older ones.  Also see link below for the decisions made on the ones discussed at ALA midwinter.

http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/marbi0806.html – Summaries of what was discussed at ALA midwinter 2008 and the actions taken.

http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/ccda/marbi0901.html – Here are the report of the 2009 ALA midwinter meeting of MARBI.

 http://wikis.ala.org/midwinter2009/index.php/ALCTS – From this site you can access the presentations from the CCS Forum: FRBR and RDA: a glimpse into the future of cataloging and public displays.   Barbara Tillett’s and John Espley’s on the VTLS OLE project were particularly pertinent.

http://vtls.com/products/virtua – This from John Espley’s presentation.  It’s an example of a FRBRized catalog.  From this page, click on Virtua Enriched User Searching Presentation.  It takes a couple minutes to download because its rather long.  It automatically pages down and it went rather quickly, but scrolling up or down would move between the slides, so you can go back and get what was missed.

 http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/03/10/functional-requirements-for-bibliographic-records/ – This is another well written and easy to understand explanation of FRBR.

 http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/775  – This is an article titled “Identifying FRBR Work- Level Data in MARC Bibliographic Records for Manifestations of Moving Images.  In code[4]lib journal  Issue t, 2008-12-15.

 http://celeripedean.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/code4lib-and-frbr/ – This blog post has lots of really good links in it.

The Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC) has moved its website. There are redirections in place from the old site to pages on the new site explaining the change. The new address is:

 http://www.rda-jsc.org/

Also the Library of Congress has new documentation available that lists MARC21 approved changes made since the 2008 Update that accommodate RDA.  Here’s the link:

http://www.loc.gov/marc/formatchanges-RDA.html

There are lots more link out there.  These are just the ones I have found most helpful.  If you know of some others, please share them on the blog, forum, or listserv.

Happy reading!

 

Karen Anderson

Authority Control Librarian

Backstage Library Works

We Need Your Input!

September 10th, 2009

Judy, one of the project managers would like opinions from multiple librarians on a question we are facing right now. Here’s what she had to say.

Hello Everyone, we are looking for feedback from our community:

MARC Proposal No. 2008-06 requested that $x ISSN’s be allowed in 8XX fields (http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2008/2008-06.html) and the proposal was approved by Library of Congress on October 2, 2008.  Just recently OCLC has decided to begin allowing $x too (see their July 2009 Technical Bulletin 257 found at:  http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/257/default.htm.

With LC’s switch from 440 to 490 and our programming changes to accommodate this, many of you are now getting $x ISSN subfields in your Bibliographic 8XXs.  This has been causing some concern and at least in one scenario, it creates a problem situation as follows:

original bib headings:
490_1 $aSTI/PUB ;$v1343
490_1 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58
830_0 $aSafety reports series ;$vno. 58.

after processing:
490_1 $aSTI/PUB ;$v1343
490_1 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58
830_0 $aSafety reports series ;$vno. 58.
830_0 $aSafety reports series,$x1020-6450 ;$vno. 58.

The resulting 830s happened this way because the 8XXs must link up with 490-1’s.  The system assumes the first 8XX belongs to the first 490-1 so it retained “Safety report series ;$vno. 58.”  Since it “thought” there was no 8XX for the second 490-1 an 8XX was created for it.  Unfortunately it was the first 490-1 that was missing a linking 8XX.

What is your practice regarding 8XX $x?  Since this is now an allowable subfield and we follow LC procedures, what will this do to your system?

Your feedback would be very welcome and much appreciated. Feel free to comment on this blog or talk about it on our Forum at:  http://ac.bslw.com/community/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34

Thanks,
Judy

Nate Cothran – new Product Manager of Automated Services

September 9th, 2009

Nate Cothran – new Product Manager of Automated Services

John Reese, the former Product Manager for Authority Control, has been promoted to Chief Operating Officer within our company. John is still available to all of us and we welcome his input whenever we get a chance to hear it.

This also means that Nate Cothran has been promoted to Vice President of Automation Services. What does this mean for you and your library? It means that the same dedication you are used to seeing with John will continue with Nate. It also means that you can feel free to contact Nate [ncothran[ a t ]bslw.com] or [800.288.1265 x255] with any questions or concerns you may have.

We thank you for your continued service and look forward to working with you always.

Backstage Library Works Automated Services

August 31st, 2009

You may have noticed that we’ve recently changed the name of this blog from MARS Authority Control to MARS Automation Services. Why the change? I’ve asked our Chief Operations Officer of the Utah location, John Reese, to explain why. Here is what he had to say.

***

Before the purchase of MARS from OCLC, Backstage Library Works ran several bibliographic automated products.  These services include Non-MARC or Brief MARC Record Upgrades (Machine Matching), Deduplication and Consolidation of bibliographic data, Union Database creation, Marcadia and Custom Programming.  Prior to this week, these services were run independent of the MARS 2.0 Automated Authority Control Service.  Backstage is happy to announce the consolidation of all of the above mentioned services and MARS 2.0 Automated Authority Control under one division to be called, “Backstage Library Works Automated Services.”

We found that there was a lot of overlapping in client needs involving authority control with the above mentioned automated bibliographic services.  All of these services require technical knowledge of the automated process.  At Backstage we are now sharing this valuable resource under one umbrella, Automated Services.  We look forward to having one department work with your sales representative in offering the most efficient automated solution for you.  Below is a list of all of the services under our newly formed Automated Services department.  If you have question about this change please contact John Reese, jreese@bslw.com.

MARS 2.0 Automated Authority Control:

MARS 2.0 service is one of the oldest and most reliable automated authority control offerings on the market. With our new system upgrade introduced in 2008, managing your authority records has never been easier.  MARS 2.0 offers name and subject authority control based on the Library of Congress name and subject authority databases (and other available National databases like MeSH, NLC, etc.).  The authority control process standardizes name, subject, series and Uniform title headings.

Automated Machine Matching:

This service offers several options to upgrade non-MARC or brief MARC records to full MARC bibliographic records.  This process searches electronic records against Backstage Library Works database and the Library of Congress Bibliographic Database to return a full standard MARC record.  There are over twenty million records to match against in this database.

Automated Deduplication:

Backstage Library Works offers a deduplication process that consolidates bibliographic or authority records in a library’s database(s).  This process is performed according to the profile specifications of the library and is often used when a library or a library consortia is forming or adding new libraries.

Union Database Creation:

Library consortia or library districts often require a central database for their consortia to work from. Backstage helps libraries create Union Bibliographic as well as Union Authority databases.

Marcadia:

Marcadia is an automated batch copy cataloging service offered jointly by OCLC and Backstage Library Works.  This product finds, evaluates and delivers catalog records from OCLC WorldCat.  It is based on search records you supply from your local system and a selection criterion you provide.  Marcadia selects matching records from WorldCat and delivers them to you.

Custom Programming:

It has been a long standing Backstage Library Works’ tradition to customize our services to the needs of our libraries.  Many libraries require special programming to accommodate either earlier cataloging practices that no longer meet current standards and need to be changed or special programming to create unique processes for their library.  Backstage takes pride in its ability to accommodate these special needs.

MARC8 and UTF8 – what does it mean?

August 25th, 2009

Last week we looked at the Anatomy of an Authority Record, but what if we look even deeper? Both Bibliographic and Authority records are essentially text, made up of characters formed either in MARC8 or UTF8. But what does that mean, and whats the difference?

MARC-8

The MARC-8 character set uses 8-bit characters, meaning it natively displays ASCII and ANSEL text. Because of the limitation of characters that this allows, the MARC-8 character set includes methods to extend the displayable characters. One method is to include both spacing base characters and nonspacing modifier characters (diacritics).

Spacing or nonspacing refers to cursor movement: a spacing character moves the cursor, a nonspacing character does not. A nonspacing character is always associated with a single spacing character, but multiple nonspacing characters may be associated with the same spacing character.

In MARC-8, when there is a nonspacing character, it precedes the associated spacing character: any cursor movement occurs after displaying the character. This method allows basic and extended Latin characters to be displayed using the default character set.

 Another method MARC-8 uses to extend the displayable characters is to use alternate character sets. This is done by using escape sequences, special character sequences containing codes to indicate which character set is being selected for display. Possible alternate sets include subscripts, superscripts, Hebrew, Cyrillic, Arabic, and Greek. Chinese, Japanese and Korean are also possible by this method using EACC character encodings for these characters. While this method allows for many additional characters to be used, it is still limited and somewhat burdensome.

 UTF-8

As computers needed to support a wider character set, many computer related companies formed a group to define the Unicode Standard. This standard is based on 16-bit characters. UTF-8 is a method of encoding these characters into sequences of from 1 to 3 bytes. Unicode, using the UTF-8 encoding, was accepted as an alternative character set for use in MARC records, with an initial limitation to using only the Unicode characters that have corresponding characters in the MARC-8 character set.

Decomposed

Unicode has definitions for nonspacing characters like MARC-8, except that the nonspacing character follows the character it modifies: cursor movement occurs before the character is displayed. Decomposed UTF-8 characters are similiar to MARC-8 diacritics, in which a base character is modified by one or more non-spacing characters. For example a base character ‘n’ with a non-spacing ‘~’ would combine to display ‘ñ’. Decomposed is also the current LC standard.

Precomposed

 Unicode also includes many precomposed characters. These are spacing characters that are the equivalent of one or more nonspacing characters and a spacing character. A precomposed ‘ñ’, instead of having a base character and an additional non-spacing diacritic mark would combine all those elements into one code which represents the character with the diacritic as a whole. This causes a more difficult normalization routine.

Normalization

To handle the various ways a composite character could be normalized, standardized normalization forms have been defined. These include NFD (Normalization Form Decomposed) and NFC (Normalization Form Composed). In NFD, every character that can be decomposed is converted to its most decomposed form following rules for canonical decomposition. In NFC, the characters are first decomposed as in NFD, then composed into precomposed (composite) forms following canonical rules.  This may result in the sequence of characters for a given character changing to an alternate, equivalent form.

Conclusion

Many library systems are moving from MARC-8 to UTF-8 character encodings. This is a good move because it gives you the ability to accurately reflect the data, while lessoning the possibility of error. Backstage Library Works can return data in MARC-8, or UTF-8 (decomposed or composed) form.

Anatomy of an Authority Record

August 18th, 2009

Those of us in the Authority side of library sciences (the dark side?) talk a lot about Authority records, but while most librarians understand bibliographic records, understanding authority records requires a whole different understanding. To help cover that, we had one of our Project Managers explain exactly what an authority record is, and whats in it.

One of the reasons Authority Control was developed was to keep headings consistent.  Just think how much fun it would be trying to sort out whose published work was whose, if there wasn’t some way to consistently clarify each author or subject or series.  For example, if you have 5 books written by 5 John Smiths, unless there is a standard for each John Smith (one is Smith, John, Jr., one is Smith, John,$d1957- , one is Smith, John$q(Johnathan), etc.) it could get crazy.

For all libraries who participate (and that’s most of them) a standard is established for every single heading created (called the “authorized form”).  Whenever a heading is used on a bib record, that authorized form should be the one a library uses.  That’s why you may enter a heading on a bib record but if we do authority control on it you might see it flipped to something else.  Currently the Library of Congress gives final approval for that standard and an authority record is created for every single heading.  What we do in the Authority Control department is help libraries manage their authority data.

All headings fall under 4 categories:  (1) NAMES; (2) NAME/TITLE COMBOS; (3) UNIFORM TITLES/SERIES; and (4) SUBJECTS.  There are also genre authorities and these come from different databases.

In the bibliographic record you have 1XX’s, 4XX’s, 6XX’s, 7XX’s and 8XX’s as the tags under authority control.  On an authority record, the authorized headings are in the 1XX of the authority record.  The “see-references” and “see-also” references are found in the 4XX and 5XX of the authority record.  Here’s an example of how the headings sync up:

Your Bib: 100 1_ $aRowling, J. K.

Authority Record: 100 1_ $aRowling, J. K.

Your Bib: 100 1_ $aRowling, J. K.

240 10 $aHarry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban

Authority Record: 100 1_ $aRowling, J. K.$tHarry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban

Your Bib:  440_0 $aHarry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban (Motion picture)

Authority Record: 130_0 $aHarry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban (Motion picture)

(ditto if this were an 830)

Your Bib:  650 _0 $aPotter, Harry (Fictitious character)

Authority Record150 _0 $aPotter, Harry (Fictitious character)

Your Bib: 651 _0 $aLondon (England)

Authority Record: 151 _0 $aLondon (England)

Your Bib:  710 2_ $aWarner Bros.

Authority Record: 110 2_ $aWarner Bros.

So …what are the parts of an Authority Record?  They are:

0XX =  These are standard numbers, classification numbers, codes, etc.  (Mostly you’ll see 001, 003, 005, 008, 010, 035, 040, 043).  A few comments about the usual ones:

001 =  In bib records this is a bib ID number (wln, oclc, etc.) – in authorities it’s the owning agency, typically the Library of Congress’, control number.  On a bib record this LCCN is found in the 010.  On the LC authority record it is the 001.

005 =  This is a date/time stamp – it will show the last time an authority record was updated.  Example:  20030808053519.0.  2003 is the year, 08 is the month, 08 is the day, and then the rest of the numbers equate down to the minute and second.

008 =  A fixed field – this field is very similar to a bib record in that it provides info on how an authority can and cannot be used (example:  it can be used as a name and/or subject heading, it can’t be used as a serial).

010 =  This is a repeat of the 001 control number.  Past control numbers appear here too:

010  $an  79065753 $zno 92031869

1XX =  Your main heading (whoo-hoo!) = see above explanation for how they match up with bib headings.  You will see:  100, 110, 111, 130, 150, 151, 155 and 185.  The 155 is for genres (which show up on bibs as 655_0 or 655_7 with a $2) and the 185 is for subject subfields (for instance, the $x in a 650 tag).

2XX =  Complex see-references.

3XX =  Complex see-also references.

4XX =  See-from references = These lead a user from an older, not authorized heading to the current valid heading (1XX).  In the authority record the tag structure typically reflects that of the 1XX:  400, 410, 411, 430, 450, 451, 455, 485.

5XX =  See-also references = These lead a user from one valid heading to another related valid heading.  In the authority record the tag structure typically reflects that of the 1XX:  500, 510, 511, 530, 550, 551, etc.

When a patron wants to look something up in an authority file on their ILS system, their findings will reflect what is found on an authority record.  For example, The authority Record below:

100 1_ $aTwain, Mark,$d1835-1910

400 1_ $aConte, Louis de,$d1835-1910

500 1_ $aClemens, Samuel Langhorne,$d1835-1910

Would Display as follows on your typical ILS System:

Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

See also:          Clements, Samuel Langhorne, 1835-1910

Clements, Samuel Langhorne, 1835-1910

See also:          Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

Conte, Louis de, 1835-1910

See:                 Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

6XX =  Notes.  These are used to explain various aspects of the authority record or to justify the heading.  The most common ones you see are 667 and 670.

7XX =  Heading Linking entries.  The most common one is the 781 field, which may show you how a geographic subdivision should be used.  Example:  781 $zIreland$zDublin.

8XX =  Alternative graphics.

9XX =  Library of Congress local tags.

By Judy Archer