Resource Description & Access (RDA)

RDA Blog or Resource Description & Access (RDA) is a blog on Resource Description and Access (RDA), a new library cataloging standard that provides instructions and guidelines on formulating data for resource description and discovery, organized based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), intended for use by libraries and other cultural organizations replacing Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2). Free for everyone Forever.

Saturday, June 8, 2013

LCSH revisions due to RDA Phase 2 revisions

The RDA Phase 2 changes to the name authority file were completed on March 27, 2013, so the Library of Congress’ Policy and Standards Division will now begin to update LCSH authority records. PSD expects to complete the project by the end of April 2013.

Personal, corporate, and conference names, as well as titles and geographic headings (MARC 21 fields 100, 110, 111, 130, and 151), that are established in the name authority file and are also printed in LCSH are eligible for revision. Phrase headings and subdivisions that are based on names or titles (e.g., Food in the Koran; Future life—Koranic teaching) will also be revised as necessary.

This is a large project that must be undertaken in a systematic manner in order to find all of the affected records. LC catalogers and SACO participants are therefore requested to refrain from making proposals to update headings until after PSD announces the completion of the project.

At this time, PSD is not planning a wholesale revision to those LC subject headings that include abbreviations that are not permitted in RDA, which chiefly appear in a subfield $y (e.g., Egypt—History—Early Dynastic Period, ca. 3100-ca. 2686 B.C.).

(Source: PSD, LC)

See also:

RDA Blog Home
About RDA - Resource Description and Access
About RDA Blog
RDA Resources
Cataloger's Reference Directory
RDA Blog Testimonials
Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

RDA Policies for Library of Congress

LC policies for a few topics recently discussed by the ABA Management Team. These policies either confirm that the interim policies LC staff have been following are still in place, or note where policies will be different in the post-March period.

The topics covered are:

Policy 1: RDA Acceptable Authority Records after March 31, 2013

Policy 2: Monographs Imported from OCLC (including copy cataloging)

Policy 3: CIP Verification

Policy 4: Working with Existing Serial Records

Policy 5: Added Volumes for Multipart Monographs

Policy 6: Manual Hybridization of AACR2 Records with RDA Elements

All staff involved with creating and updating LC/NACO authority records should pay particular attention to Policy 1 on the treatment of authority records. Policies 2-6 are primarily applicable to ABA and other processing units choosing to follow them.

These policies are also posted at http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/pdf/rda-policies-for-lc.pdf

Phase 2 Changes to the LC/NACO Authority FileAlso note that the Phase 2 changes to the LC/NACO authority file were completed this week-- 371,942 records were updated as part of this process. Should you encounter one of these revised headings in your normal work, please use the new authorized form in your bibliographic record. A similar automated change is being planned for updating headings in bibliographic records, but until this process is complete, headings will be out of synchronization between the authority record and bibliographic records. Until the automated changes to bibliographic records are complete, it is not necessary to perform bibliographic file maintenance on existing bibliographic records, nor report the discrepancies to PSD.

Questions on these policies may be sent to LChelp4RDA@loc.gov

Acronyms as variants in RDA NARs

QUESTION:

Would the same rules for qualifying a corporate body apply to both the heading and the variants? For example, would this be appropriate under RDA:

110 2_ Progressive Artists Group (Jaipur, India)

410 2_ PAG (Jaipur, India)

We would never qualified "PAG" under AACR2 when it's used as a variant form. When it's used as a heading, of course, then we would qualify. What about in RDA?

ANSWER:

We had a very specific LCRI practice that basically forbade the adding of qualifiers to many kinds of references, we got rid of those restrictions on variants because they represented an exception that wasn't really important and only caused confusion. 11.13.2.1 tells you that you can add the same additions to variants as to authorized access points.

For personal names see RDA Rule 9.19.2.1

(Reproduction of Question and Answer from experts from LC)

<<<<<---------->>>>>

RDA Rule 11.13.2.1 : General Guidelines on Constructing Variant Access Points to Represent Corporate Bodies [This rule suggests to Make additions to the name, if considered important for identification]:

Addition to a Name Not Conveying the Idea of a Corporate Body
Place Associated with the Body
Associated Institution
Date Associated with the Body
Type of Jurisdiction
Other Designation Associated with the Body
Number, Date, and Location of a Conference, Etc.

RDA Rule 9.19.2.1 : General Guidelines on Constructing Variant Access Points to Represent Persons

[Revised on 2015-06-18]

See also:

RDA Blog Home
About RDA - Resource Description and Access
About RDA Blog
RDA Resources
Cataloger's Reference Directory
RDA Blog Testimonials
Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Revised LC-PCC Policy for Fuller form of name (9.19.1.4, option)

From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Reser, Dave
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 5:23 PM
To: PCCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

Subject: [PCCLIST] Revised LC-PCC Policy for Fuller form of name (9.19.1.4, option)

Dear PCC members--

The policy related to the optional use of the RDA element "Fuller form of name" in authorized access points for persons (RDA 9.19.1.4, option) has been the subject of debate by more than one PCC Task Group, the PCC Policy Committee, and listservs such as PCCLIST. LC and PCC have agreed to a new shared policy for this instruction (a change from the previous LC policy). Because of the high level of interest in this topic, and the postponement of the February release of the RDA Toolkit where it would have been published (http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog/517 ), we have taken the exceptional step of mounting the revised policy so that it may be applied immediately by catalogers. Until it is published in the Toolkit, the policy will reside in the Section "Preliminary Publication of LC-PCC PS" at http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/lcps_access.html (the revised policy is also included below).

Training documentation will be updated to reflect the change in policy.
Thanks, Becky Culbertson (PCC SCS chair) and Dave Reser (LC PSD)

LC‐PCC PS for 9.19.1.4, Option (Fuller form of name)

New Authority Records

LC practice/PCC practice for Optional addition: Apply the option to provide a fuller form of name if a part of the forename or surname used in the preferred name is represented by an initial or an abbreviation, if the cataloger considers it important for identification. Add unused forenames or surnames only if needed to distinguish one access point from another (see RDA 9.19.1.4).

Existing Authority Records

LC practice/PCC practice for Optional addition: Unless otherwise changing an existing heading (e.g., conflict), do not change an existing AACR2 or RDA heading merely to add or remove a fuller form of name.

Cataloger's Desktop Now Contains Six RDA-Related Resources

Library of Congress

News from CDS

Cataloger's Desktop Now Contains Six RDA-Related Resources

Another RDA-related resource has been added to Cataloger's Desktop. The new resource, RDA training resources, is maintained by the CILIP-BL Committee on RDA and provides links to RDA training from Cambridge University Library, CILIP Cataloguing & Indexing Group, the Australian Committee on Cataloguing, rdacake (RDA CAnadian Knowledge Exchange), Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, National Library of New Zealand, and several U.S. contributors.

The following is the current list of RDA-Related resources in Cataloger's Desktop:

*         RDA: Information and Resources in Preparation for RDA (LC)
*         RDA: LC Documentation for the RDA Test
*         RDA: Resource Description and Access (subscription resource that requires a separate subscription to RDA Toolkit)
*         RDA-L (JSC)
*         RDA Training Resources (CILIP-BL)
*         RDA Vocabularies (Open Metadata Registry)

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Conference Names as Subordinate Bodies

In RDA the instructions for subordinate bodies (11.2.2.14) are the same as in AACR2.

Type 3 – Name that is general in nature
•Annual Meeting; Macadamia Nut Association
•110 2# $a Macadamia Nut Association. $b Annual Meeting

Type 6 – Name that includes the entire name of the higher body
•Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission
•110 2# $a International Whaling Commission. $b Annual Meeting

[Source: Library of Congress RDA Training materials]

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Monday, June 3, 2013

Choosing the Preferred Name in Conferences, Seminars, Workshops, etc

l RDA 11.2.2.2

Sources of Information:

“Determine the preferred name for a corporate body from the following sources (in order of preference):

a) the preferred sources of information (see 2.2.2) in resources associated with the corporate body

b) other formal statements appearing in resources associated with the corporate body

c) other sources (including reference sources)”

l RDA 11.2.2.5

Different Forms of the Same Name:

“If different forms of a corporate body's name appear in resources associated with the body, apply the general instructions given below. When appropriate, apply the special instructions given under 11.2.2.5.1–11.2.2.5.4 as well.”

l RDA 11.2.2.5

Different Forms of the Same Name:

Order of preference:

• Form appearing in preferred sources of information

• Form presented formally on preferred source, if more than one

• Most commonly found form

• Brief form that would differentiate the body

l RDA 11.2.2.5.1

Variant Spellings :

“If variant spellings of the name appear in resources associated with the body, choose the form found in the first resource received.”

l RDA 11.2.2.5.2

More Than One Language Form of the Name:

Order of preference:

• Form in the official language of the body.

l LCPS: If there is more than one official language and one of these is English, choose the form in English

• Form in language used predominantly in resources

• Form that is presented first in the first resource received

[Source: Library of Congress RDA Training materials]

Conferences, meetings, exhibitions, fairs and festivals

These events now have the same rules

l RDA 11.2.2.11

Number or Year of Convocation of a Conference, Etc.:

“Omit from the name of a conference, congress, meeting, exhibition, fair, festival, etc. […] indications of its number, or year or years of convocation, etc.”

l No instruction to remove an indication of frequency (Annual, Biennial, etc.)

<<<<----------------->>>>

Examples:

l Omit year of convocation:

• CAV (Conference)

l NOT

• CAV ’91

l Retain indication of frequency (Annual, Biennial, etc.):

• Annual Conference on Fishing

l NOT

• Conference on Fishing [with “Annual” omitted]

[Source: Library of Congress RDA Training materials]

Named Conferences

Under RDA a conference name need not contain a word that denotes a conference, to be considered named

LCRI 21.1.B1 has no equivalent in RDA or in the LC-PCC PS

~~• LCRI 21.1.B1:~~

~~• “… when deciding whether a phrase is a name is that the phrase must include a word that connotes a meeting: "symposium," "conference," "workshop," "colloquium," etc.”~~

<<<<----------------->>>>

A named conference need only fulfill these RDA definitions

l RDA 8.1.2

Person, Family, and Corporate Body:

“The term corporate body refers to an organization or group of persons and/or organizations that is identified by a particular name and that acts, or may act, as a unit.”

l RDA 8.1.3

Name:

“The term name refers to a word, character, or group of words and/or characters by which a person, family, or corporate body is known.”

<<<<----------------->>>>

l Conference names eligible for use as an authorized access point (111 or 711)

• Freedom & Faith

• Digital Library Futures: User Perspectives and Institutional Strategies

l Considered unnamed under AACR2, but named under RDA

l May not convey the idea of a corporate body (conference)

<<<<----------------->>>>

Additions to names

l RDA 11.7.1.4

Names Not Conveying the Idea of a Corporate Body:

“If the preferred name for the body does not convey the idea of a corporate body, record a suitable designation in the language preferred by the agency creating the data.”

l Examples:

• Freedom & Faith (Conference) (1984 : Saint Charles, Ill.)

• Digital Library Futures: User Perspectives and Institutional Strategies (Conference) (2009 : Milan, Italy)

<<<<----------------->>>>

See also LC-PCC PS for 11.7.1.4

l Initialisms and Acronyms

• “If the name chosen for the authorized access point for a corporate body is an initialism or acronym written in all capital letters (with or without periods between them), add a qualifier to the name.”

l Example:

CICA (Conference) (2011 : Hangzhou, China)

<<<<----------------->>>>

[Source: Library of Congress RDA Training Materials]

Follow RDA Blog in Social Media: Google+ | Facebook | Google+ Community | Twitter | YouTube | SlideShare | Tumblr | WordPress | Flipboard | Pinterest | LinkedIn

Thanks all for your love, suggestions, testimonials, likes, +1, tweets and shares ....

See also related posts in following RDA Blog Categories (Labels):

Thursday, May 30, 2013

RECORDING VARIANT TITLES IN RDA

RDA Examples of Variant Titles in MARC 21

EXAMPLE

245 10 $a XX centuries & Mt. St. Helens ...
246 3# $a 20 centuries and Mount Saint Helens

246 3# $a Twenty centuries and Mount Saint Helens

Monday, May 27, 2013

Use of 500 and 510 Field to Show Relationships in a Corporate Body Name

RDA RELATIONSHIP DESIGNATORS

RDA Cataloging Examples of Relationships in a Corporate Body Name : Founder ; Hierarchical superior

Click on image to enlarge

(note the use of relationship designator in 510 field)
(note NAR change from AACR2 to RDA in 410 field)

<<<<<---------->>>>>

RDA Cataloging Examples of Relationships in a Corporate Body Name : Successor ; Predecessor ; Hierarchical superior ;

Click on image to enlarge

[Revised on 2015-04-13]

<<<<<---------->>>>>

RDA Blog : RDA Blog is a blog on Resource Description and Access (RDA), a new library cataloging standard that provides instructions and guidelines on formulating data for resource description and discovery, organized based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), intended for use by libraries and other cultural organizations replacing Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR2). This blog lists description and links to resources on Resource Description & Access (RDA). It is an attempt to bring together at one place all the useful and important information, rules, references, news, and links on Resource Description and Access, FRBR, FRAD, FRSAD, MARC standards, AACR2, BIBFRAME, and other items related to current developments and trends in library cataloging practice.

RDA Blog History: RDA Blog was created by Salman Haider, a Cataloging & Metadata Librarian Blogger & Online Social Media Expert from India. RDA Blog embarked on its journey to provide useful information to Resource Description and Access (RDA) in August 2011. It received good response from librarians, catalogers, and library professionals from all around the world. It is interesting to note that the first hundred thousand pageviews to RDA Blog came in 3 years, but it took just 8 months to reach another hundred thousand pageviews. At present it is viewed at a rate of fifteen to twenty thousand times per month. RDA Blog is widely followed in social media.

See also: