Sunday, December 29, 2013

Compilation with the original language and 2 translations : RDA Example


CASE: Compilation with the Original language and Translations in two Languages
Look at the following record from the LC Online Catalog and note the RDA cataloging treatment for preferred title:

010__ |a 2013317195
020__ |a 9789350870730
025__ |a I-San-2013-317195; 15
040__ |a DLC |b eng |c DLC |e rda
0411_ |a eng |a hin |a san |h san
042__ |a lcode
05000 |a MLCSA 2013/01309 (P) |a PK3799.J36
1001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya, |e author.
24510 |a Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭiḥ / |c Rasarājaviracitā = Rasaraja’s 62 small flowery stories = 62 kathākusuma / Rasarāja- viracitā ; edited with English & Hindi translation by Dr. Gargi C. Pandit, Dr. Kalpana V. Gandhi, Varda A. Vasa, Vaidehi C. Pandit, Kaushalya R. Rajpurohit, Kamakshi H. Jani.
24631 |a Rasaraja’s 62 small flowery stories
24631 |a 62 kathākusuma
264_1 |a Baroda : |b Savitri Prakashan, |c 2013.
300__ |a xxiv, 348 pages ; |c 22 cm
336__ |a text |2 rdacontent
337__ |a unmediated |2 rdamedia
338__ |a volume |2 rdacarrier
500__ |a Short stories.
546__ |a English, Hindi, and Sanskrit.
520__ |a Sanskrit short stories with English and Hindi translation.
7001_ |a Pandit, Gargi C., |e editor.
70012 |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi.
70012 |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi. |l English.
70012 |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi. |l Hindi.  (not provided in bibliographic record by the cataloger, as access for one/first translation is core, as given for English(second analytical); this (third) analytical entry can also be given, but is optional.

NOTE: NAR is created for the first two analytical entries.

LC control no.:n 2012218836
LCCN permalink:
HEADING:Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi
00000528cz a2200157n 450
008130903n| azannaabn |a aaa
010__ |a n 2012218836
040__ |a DLC |b eng |c DLC |e rda
046__ |k 2013
1001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi
370__ |g Vadodara, India
4001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭiḥ
4001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t 62 kathākusuma
670__ |a Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭiḥ, 2013.

LC control no.:n 2012218837
LCCN permalink:
HEADING:Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi. English
00000475cz a2200145n 450
008130903n| azannaabn |a aaa
010__ |a n 2012218837
040__ |a DLC |b eng |c DLC |e rda
046__ |k 2013
1001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi. |l English
370__ |g Vadodara, India
4001_ |a Jānī, Jayadeva Aruṇodaya. |t Rasaraja’s 62 small flowery stories
670__ |a Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭiḥ, 2013.


Question: In which case 240 and 7xx for original title to be there?

Answer: (with remarks from experts from LC) What we have here is a compilation with the original language and 2 translations. The 1st question we have to ask is for the preferred title, do we go 1. with the "commonly known" title (Kathākusumadvāṣaṣṭi … ) or 2. with the conventional collective title (Short stories. Selections … ). Here, it's best practice to go with the "commonly known" title. The 3 analytical 700s that you have given are correct. The 240 should not be used here in these situations (whenever there are more than one language presented).

Friday, December 20, 2013

How Did RDA Come To Be?


In the late 1990’s the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules decided to make changes for the future of AACR. It realized that the changes that give us a new way to look at our environment also give us new opportunities to improve how we deliver bibliographic information to users.

Resource Description and Access

In 2002, work had begun on a revision of AACR2, called AACR3.  However, by April 2005, the plan had changed.  The reactions to an initial draft raised particular concerns about the need to move to closer alignment with the FRBR model and to build an element set. It was clear that we could not continue doing cataloging the way we always had.  We could no longer produce records in MARC format in systems that could not talk to the rest of the information community.

A new plan was developed and the name was changed to Resource Description and Access to emphasize the two important tasks. Importantly, the Anglo-American emphasis was removed.

Collaboration with Other Communities

The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) for the Development of RDA has paid close attention to developments in IFLA as well as in various metadata communities, and initiated collaborations with the publishers’ community who were developing their own metadata set called ONIX.  Together these parties developed controlled vocabularies for media types, content types, and carrier types (called the RDA/ONIX Framework).
In 2007, JSC representatives met with key collaborators and agreed to examine the fit between RDA and other metadata models.  Together we have created an initial registry for the RDA elements and controlled terms, available freely on the Web.

In 2008 the JSC started participating in a joint effort to determine what revisions are necessary to accommodate the encoding of RDA in MARC 21. The RDA/MARC Working Group has presented proposals to MARBI (the Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information committee of ALA), many of which have already been approved.

RDA addresses all types of materials collected by libraries, but defers to specialized cataloging manuals for more specific rules needed for some types of materials -- for cultural objects, rare materials, cartographic resources, and more. In some cases, there will be a transition or “bridge” period to move from current practices and formats and systems to the next generation.

A Tool for the Digital World

The Joint Steering Committee stated among the goals for RDA that it was to be a tool designed for the digital world.  This had several implications:
  • RDA was to be a Web-based tool optimized for use as an online product. The result is the RDA Toolkit, which continues to be refined with feedback from users.
  • RDA was to be a tool that addresses cataloging all types of content and media
  • RDA was to be a tool that results in records that are intended for use in the digital environment, through the Internet, Web-OPACs, etc.
  • RDA was intended to result in records with a metadata set of elements intended to be readily adaptable to newly emerging database structures.


RDA Specific Goals

Although not all of the stated goals for RDA have yet been reached, but good progress is being made and proposals for improvements are still welcome.  Specifically, RDA rules were to:

  • be easy to use and interpret
  • be applicable to an online, networked environment
  • provide effective bibliographic control for all types of media
  • encourage use beyond the library community
  • be compatible with other similar standards
  • have a logical structure based on internationally agreed-upon principles
  • separate content and carrier data, and separate content from display
  • provide numerous examples, appropriate and relevant to the specific instruction

[Source: Library of Congress]