RDA, The Next Phase

FRBR, FRAD and RDA: From Conceptual Models to Cataloging ApplicationsMarjorie E. BlossLACONIFebruary 25, 2011

11In This PresentationWhy RDA?The Foundation for RDA (FRBR and FRAD)RDA Content rules and examplesRDA Toolkit what it looks like and how it worksWhats next?

It is really impossible to talk about RDA, Resource Description and Access without talking about the conceptual models FRBR and FRAD on which it is based. I dont want to cover information you already know. On the other hand, I dont want you to feel as if Im starting in the middle of the story and you have no prior notion of plot or characters. So! Would a review of FRBR be useful to you before talking about RDA?2Began with Panizzi, Jewett, and Cutter to a number of cataloging codes through the 1960sAttempts to develop one set of cataloging rules for both the US and the UKDevelopment of Lubetzkys Paris Principles led to AACRAACR2: one more attempt for one code, based on ISBDAnglo-American Cataloging Traditions33Who Is Responsible?4AACR2 and now RDA have been created by representatives from six Anglo organizations. Looking at the chart from the bottom up, we begin with the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA or the JSC. Individuals representing the American Library Associations Cataloging and Classification Description and Access Committee, the Australian Committee on Cataloguing, the British Library, the Canadian Cataloguing Committee, the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals, and the Library of Congress are the ones directly involved in creating RDA. An editor was hired specifically for the creation of RDA and the JSC Secretary was essential in keeping all the decisions and meeting notes in order.

The RDA Fund Trustees are comprised of the three publishers of AACR2 and RDA. The American Library Association, the Canadian Library Association, and CILIP.

The representatives sitting on the Committee of Principals have their parallels with the JSC although ACOC is represented by the National Library of Australia and the CCC is represented by the Library and Archives Canada.

Finally, a project manager was hired specifically to coordinate the development of RDA content and product activities and to oversee the project in general.

Description of review process.4AACR2 CharacteristicsCreated for a card catalog environmentProvides rules for both description and displayIs limited when describing digital materialsDoes not demonstrate how works are related to one another

AACR2 was issued in 1978 but not adopted until 1981. We were still very much inhabiting a world governed by the card catalog although MARC had been created and was catching on.

The basis for AACR2 description was the International Standard Bibliographic Description or ISBD. ISBD provided rules for both the order of data areas and elements of a descriptive cataloging record (first comes the title, then other title information, then statement of responsibility, then subsequent statement of responsibility, etc.) as well as the punctuation to be used separating one area from another and one element from another.

While AACR2 does talk about relationships of authors and works, it does so only peripherally.

In 2004, the JSC distributed a draft of what was then called AACR3. Those who commented on the draft felt it needed to focus more on current and evolving technologies (that is digital resources) and recommended to the JSC that it revamp its work with an eye towards developing a cataloging code that would concentrate more on the future than the past.5GOALS: RDA will be A new standard for resource description and accessDesigned for the digital worldOptimized for use as an online productDescription and access of all resources All types of content and media Resulting records usable in the digital environment (Internet, Web OPACs, etc.)

To this end, the JSC and CoP identified specific goals for the new cataloging code.

READ SLIDE67RDA will be A consistent, flexible, and extensible frameworkCompatible with internationally established principles, models, and standardsPrimarily for use in libraries, but also adaptable across many information communities worldwide

7The Goals in the RDA Strategic Plan declare that RDA will provide a consistent, flexible, and extensible framework for both the technical and content description of all types of resources and all types of content; that it will be compatible with internationally established principles, models, and standards.While RDA is being developed for use in English language communities, it can also be used in other language communities. We anticipate that other countries will translate it and adjust its instructions to follow their preferred language and script conventions just as there are now many translations of AACR2. Options are also being added to allow for use of other languages and scripts, other calendars, other numeric systems, etc., beyond those commonly used in Anglo-American countries.RDA is also intended to produce information that is compatible across many communities like publishers, archives, museums, and other information organizations.7International Meeting of Experts International Cataloguing Committee (IME ICC)IFLA Section on Cataloguing and its working groups on FRBR and FRADRDA/MARC/MARBIONIX (Publishers)RDA, Dublin Core, IEEE/LOM, Semantic WebData Modeling Meeting - London 2007

Collaborations with other Communities 8The Joint Steering Committee has also paid close attention to developments in other metadata communities, and initiated collaborations with the publishers who were developing their own metadata set called ONIX. Together we developed controlled vocabularies for media types, content types, and carrier types.In 2007, JSC representatives met at the British Library with key representatives from Dublin Core, IEEE/LOM, and Semantic Web communities and agreed to examine the fit between RDA and other metadata models. We agreed to work together to develop a data dictionary and create a registry for the RDA elements sets and controlled terms.The JSC began a joint effort with MARBI n early 2008 to determine what revisions are necessary to accommodate the encoding of RDA in MARC 21 for the initial release of RDA. The RDA/MARC Working Group presented proposals to MARBI at their meetings during the ALA conferences that were approved and we anticipate there will be plenty of time for us to implement those changes into our integrated library systems.8RDAs FoundationFunctional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR)Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD)Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD in progress)

As I previously mentioned, the foundation for RDA is found on two conceptual models: Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD). A third model is currently under development dealing with subject data.

This presentation will concentrate primarily on FRBR and its three groups of entities.9FRBR TerminologyEntities (categories)

Attributes (characteristics)

Relationships (between and among entities)

10These three terms entities, attributes, relationships express at the most basic level the approach of FRBR and, in turn, RDA. We are dealing with a variety of entities, which we describe by assigning attributes, and finally we delineate the often complex relationships among and between those entities.FRBR Group 1 EntitiesWork

Expression

Manifestation

Item

11The first group of FRBR entities divides the bibliographic universe into works, expressions, manifestations, and items. FRBR Group 2 EntitiesThose responsible for intellectual or artistic content, physical production and dissemination, or custodianship of Group 1 entitiesPersonsFamiliesCorporate bodies

Group 2 entities include entities responsible for creating works, expressions, manifestations, and items or in some way being responsible for their existence.12FRBR Group 3 EntitiesSubjectsCan include any Group 1 or Group 2 entityplusConceptsObjectsEventsPlace

13Group 3 entities deal with subjects. Of course a work or expression can be a subject of someone elses work but a person, family, or corporate body can also be a subject as can concepts, objects, events, and places. (Traditional cataloging practice in fact recognizes families, but only as subjects.)

At present the RDA chapters specifically on subjects are placeholders, awaiting completion of the FRBRs and FRADs companion model on subjectsGroup 1 EntitiesWorkis realized throughExpressionis embodied inManifestationis exemplified byItem

14Returning to the Group 1 entities, one way of understanding them and an essential way of grasping their implications for bibliographic control is to understand how they are related. The classic introductions to FRBR show these entities and relationships with boxes and arrows showing how the relationships are reciprocal and in many instances potentially multiple. For the present purpose, suffice it to say that a work is realized through one or more expressions, an expression (or indeed potentially more than one expression) is embodied given material existence in one or more manifestations, and a manifestation is exemplified by one or (usually, in the modern world) more than one item.

Lets see how this plays out using the example of Shakespeares Romeo and Juliet.

I would like to thank Richard Stewart for allowing me to use the next five slides.WorkA distinct intellectual or artistic creationVery abstract! does not correspond with any tangible thing(At right : Shakespeare thinks about creating Romeo and Juliet)

15Work is defined as a distinct intellectual or artistic creation. This is by far the most abstract of the FRBR Group 1 entities, recognizing an idea or a concept of something that can be held. Here we see Shakespeare as we might imagine him reflecting on a popular story about star-crossed young lovers and beginning to come up with ExpressionThe intellectual or artistic realization of a workSpecific sequence of words in a textual work, translations, notes in a musical work, interpretations, etc.Still abstract!

16As soon as Shakespeare started not just writing but thinking of lines and stage directions, he had crossed the misty and elusive border between Work and Expression. Why? Because he has created a specific sequence of words. Again, this is an important concept, as we will see, but it is still abstract that is, the words are not yet bound to a medium, or to put it in FRBR/RDA terms, not yet physically embodied in ManifestationThe physical embodiment of an expression of a workAn expression can be embodied in multiple manifestations (e.g. print, microform, digital)

17 a manifestation. Here we enter more familiar territory. When we catalog published or manufactured resources, we normally catalog at the manifestation level though we often say we catalog the edition. What we are recording, and providing access to, are the characteristics (attributes) that can reasonably be taken as common to all the items (particular examples) of that manifestation.ItemA single exemplar of a manifestation

18This is the other Group 1 entity that needs no introduction : the item. This is what you own or what you check out of the library.Related or Derivative Works

19Beyond that, there are other entities that must be considered separate works, but still related to Shakespeares work each with its own set of relationships to creators and other Group 2 and Group 3 entities, each with potentially numerous expressions and manifestations User TasksAssociated with bibliographic data (FRBR)

FindTo find entities corresponding to the user's stated search criteriaIdentifyTo identify an entitySelectTo select an entity appropriate to the user's needsObtainTo acquire or obtain access to the entity described

20Going back many years, we have provided explanations as to why a catalog is important. Anthony Panizzi, Charles Cutter, S.R. Ranganathan, Seymour Lubetzky all articulated why what we do is important, focusing primarily on the user. FRBR follows this tradition by identifying four user tasks.

These are tasks familiar to anyone who has used or assisted patrons in a library. Find: Help! I have a paper due tomorrow and I need a book on the Trojan War! OK, lets look under the subject heading Trojan War -- Identify: heres one. Select: Thats 400 pages! Ill never get through that tonight. How about this one? 120 pages, thats better. And its got a bibliography too. Obtain: Where is it? The catalog says its on the shelf, call number is 929.31 STR, should be right here. RDA, of course, is meant to support these user tasks at many levels of complexity and sophistication, whether the user is a procrastinating high-schooler or a tenured professor doing major research (we all know professors never procrastinate).User TasksAssociated with authority data (FRAD)

FindFind an entity or set of entities corresponding to stated criteriaIdentifyIdentify an entityContextualize*Place a person, corporate body, work, etc. in context; clarify relationships between two or more persons, corporate bodies, works, etc.; and between a person, corporate body, etc. and the name by which that person, body, etc. is knownJustify*Document the authority data creator's reason for choosing name or form of name*tasks carried out by those who create authority data

21The user tasks associated with authority data are a little different. Find and Identify are basically the same as for bibliographic data, and anyone who uses a bibliographic database may carry out these tasks. Contextualize and Justify are normally done by those who create authority data. You may recognize how these tasks are reflected in authority records if you have created such records or reviewed them in depth. Contextualize is the task that, for example, generates see and see also references. Justify includes much of what is in the authority records 670 fields. (We wont have time to go into this, but RDA will also entail a set of new fields for authority records that will specify, by attribute (e.g., associated place, address, field of activity, affiliation), the information now included in the 670, for better use by future systems and services.)A Look at RDACompared to AACR2:

IT SURE SOUNDS DIFFERENT!

IT SURE LOOKS DIFFERENT!

22Organization of RDAThree concepts:

Resource DescriptionAccess Point ControlRelationships

23Where AACR2 is divided into two major parts, RDA is divided into three. One major difference is that, within the resource description chapters, RDA does not have format-specific divisions as AACR2 does. Those format-specific chapters in AACR2 were a major advance toward bringing all formats to an equal footing and describing them according to common principles, but they did carry an inherent limitation : when a new format came along, a chapter in Part I had to be either revised drastically or newly prepared. RDA was explicitly designed to [p]rovide a consistent, flexible, and extensible framework for both the technical and content description of all types of resources and all types of content. (Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA, Strategic Plan for RDA, 2005-2009)Outline of RDA chapters

24Tom Delsey, the editor of RDA, mapped each chapter to the FRBR and FRAD user tasks and entities that it covers. (This table is available on the JSC website, http://www.rda-jsc.org/ .)

The three implementation scenarios refer to the kind of database RDA records might be created and stored in. Scenario 1 is for a relational or object-oriented database structure that mirrors the FRBR and FRAD models. Scenarios 2 and 3 reflect what is normally found in library applications, so we see MARC tags cited here. Scenario 2 would be a database in which bibliographic and authority records are linked; Scenario 3 would be a flat-file database without links between authority and bibliographic records, where access points are stored with bibliographic data in the same record.

You can see that RDA moves us from recording attributes of manifestation and item in the bibliographic record, then work and expression and person, family, and corporate body in authority records Outline of RDA chapters

25 to recording relationships, in the bibliographic record again (for now we are skipping the concept, object, event, place chapters remember these are basically placeholders for now), first between the Group 1 entities, then to associated Group 2 entities Outline of RDA chapters

26 and then in Section 8 we move into the types of relationships recorded in authority records.Outline of RDA chapters

27RDAs FoundationStructure of RDA itself relies heavily on FRBR and FRADTerminology used has its basis in these two conceptual modelsEntities, Attributes, RelationshipsAlso user tasks Find, Identify, Select, Obtain, Conceptualize, Justify

28RDAs Structure -- AttributesGeneral guidelines (chapter 1)Attributes Of FRBR Group 1 entities (chapters 2-7)

Of FRBR Group 2 entities (chapters 8-11) which also includes access point control

Of FRBR Group 3 entities (chapters 12-16) which are place holder chapters for now

It is like learning a new language. However while the terminology may be new many of the concepts are the same as in AACR2. Attributes (at least for Works, Expressions, Manifestations, and Items correspond quite closely to the first part of AACR2 where we were describing books, maps, musical scores, continuing resources, etc.

Included in the attributes, however, are the attributes for persons, families, and corporate bodies, the Group 2 entities. These were covered primarily in chapters 22-24 of AACR2. We just didnt think of them as attributes when we added birth and death dates of people, the addition of peoples titles and ranks, dates of change in corporate bodies, etc. Included in these chapters are guidelines for creating authorized access points in other words, authority control.

As with AACR2, subject headings are not included in RDA but in anticipation of work being done by an IFLA group working on a document similar to FRBR and FRAD, place holder chapters have been included in RDA so when the day comes text can be easily inserted. 29RDAs Structure -- RelationshipsRelationship of FRBR Group 1entities to Group 2 entities (who wrote it, created it, illustrated it, edited it, acted in it, etc. chapters 18-22)Relationship of FRBR Group 1 entities to Group 3 entities (chapter 23 place holder chapter for now)

30RDAs Structure -- RelationshipsRecording relationships between Group 1 Entities (all those contents notes, title changes, derivative works chapters 24-28)Recording relationships between Group 2 Entities (the connection between Shakespeare and Leonard Bernstein chapters 29-32)

31RDA AppendicesMany more than were in AACR2Some (Abbreviations and Capitalization) are the same as in AACR2)Some notable differencesInstructions on using ISBDMapping from ISBD and MARC to RDATitles of nobility (previously in chapter 22)Relationship designators (who did what?)

You can see that RDA includes many more appendices than did AACR2. Some of these appendices are identical to AACR2 (abbreviations and capitalization). In other cases, AACR2 rules have been included in an appendix rather than included in the chapters themselves (titles of nobility for example). Still other chapters are completely new such as the RDA option of using ISBD for order of data elements and display and the long lists found in Appendix I that identify relationship designators the roles people, families, and corporate bodies play in creating a work.32Terminology in AACR2 and RDAAACR2ISBD dictates content and displayChief source of informationHeading

Author, composer, etc.RDAInstructions only for contentPreferred source of informationAuthorized access pointCreator

A huge concern, discussed by numerous people, has been over what is happening to ISBD (both order of data areas and elements and the punctuation) in RDA. Many have lamented the demise of ISBD. The death of ISBD, however, is premature. It isnt dead but instead in RDA it is an option and information on its use can be found in Appendix D of RDA. There most certainly are occasions when ISBD is extremely helpful, however in our online catalogs and certainly on the web there is no longer the need for emphasizing the order of data or the punctuation that goes along with it.

Other terminology found in RDA reflects our shift from a catalog card environment to an online one. Additionally, the vocabulary used in RDA reflects terminology that is being used by other information communities thus bringing us more in line so we can use these terms in a more uniform way.33Terminology in AACR2 and RDAAACR2See referenceSee also reference

Physical descriptionRDAVariant access pointAuthorized access point for related entityCarrier description

34Terminology in AACR2 and RDAAACR2Main entry

Uniform TitleRDAPreferred title + authorized access point for creator if appropriate(1) Preferred title (+ other information to differentiate);(2) Conventional collective title

35Terminology in AACR2 and RDAAACR2

GMDRDAMedia type +Carrier type +Content type +

36Some Specific Rules WEMI AttributesNotice that RDA begins its instructions with the Group 1 entities of manifestations and itemsCore elements have been identified for recording bibliographic attributesNeed to identify what youre cataloging and the source of informationTake what you see

37Spell it Out!Terms we previously abbreviated are now spelled outPagesVolumesGeographic abbreviationsThird revised edition (if thats how it appears on the preferred source of information (previously the chief source)All in the name of internationalization

38Compare and Contrast Description/AttributesAACR2Rule of 3Omit titles of nobility, address, honor, etc.

Use formatted field for serials enumeration and chronologyRDANo longer limited to 3Include titles of nobility, address, honor, etc.Option of using unformatted note for serials enumeration and chronology

RDA allows for many more ways of accessing a resource than AACR2 did. No longer are we limited to listing only three people or corporate bodies responsible for a work. This will provide our users with more possibilities of finding the materials they are searching for.39Compare and Contrast Description/AttributesAACR2GMD found in two listsOne for the UKOne for Australia, Canada, and the U.S.Broadly describes various formatsFound in MARC 245 $hRDAGDM now a single list for allHas been split into three discrete elementsContent (MARC 336)Media (MARC 337)Carrier (MARC 338)

40Compare and Contrast Description/AttributesAACR2Include home country if not first place of publication named

Use s.l., s.n.

Include multiple publishersRDARecord only the first place of publication no home country provisionNow Place of publication not identified, Publisher not identifiedOnly first publishers name is required

41Compare and Contrast Description/AttributesAACR2Permitted to shorten publishers nameInternational identifiers focus on ISBN and ISSNRDASpell out publishers name in fullIncludes numbers assigned by publishers, distributors, music publisher numbers in addition to ISBN and ISSN

42Personal NamesChapter 9 includes establishing authorized form of the nameMany rules identical to AACR2Spell out abbreviations like fl. (flourished), approximately, born, diedInclude individuals role and/or relationship to the work

Family Names New to RDAAlignment with archival communityFound in chapter 10 again includes instructions for authorized forms of namesType of familyDates associated with the familyPlaces associated with the familyProminent members of the family

44Corporate BodiesChapter 11 of RDAVery similar to AACR2, including restricting instances for corporate body as a main entryWill see more corporate bodies included in statements of responsibility, however but this is not the same as the definition of a creator

45Works Accepted as Sacred ScriptureUse as the uniform title for a sacred scripture (see 21.37) the title by which it is most commonly identified in English-language reference sources dealing with the religious group(s) to which the scripture belongs. If no such source is available, use general reference sources. AvestaBibleKoranTalmudTripiaka

Choose as the preferred title for a sacred scripture the title by which it is most commonly identified in reference sources in the language preferred by the agency creating the data that deal with the religious group or groups to which the scripture belongs. If no such source is available, use general reference sources.AvestaBibleHoly PibyKitb al-aqdasQuranTalmudTripiaka

AACR2 25.17ARDA 6.23.2.5

46(Adam Schiff) Additional examples have been added to show the preferred title of a sacred scripture. The preferred title used for the Koran is changed in RDA to a different transliterated form: Quran.

25.17A. Use as the uniform title for a sacred scripture (see 21.37) the title by which it is most commonly identified in English-language reference sources dealing with the religious group(s) to which the scripture belongs. If no such source is available, use general reference sources.

6.23.2.5 Choose as the preferred title for a sacred scripture the title by which it is most commonly identified in reference sources in the language preferred by the agency creating the data that deal with the religious group or groups to which the scripture belongs. If no such source is available, use general reference sources.46RDA RelationshipsWorks to works: Romeo and Juliet to West Side StorySerial title changesExpressions to expressions: one translation to another; one interpretation to anotherManifestation: content remains the same, the carrier or media changes

Examples Handout100 field: inclusion of $e to indicate creators role300: no abbreviations for pages, illustrations, etc.300: cm is abbreviated because it is considered as a scientific term336, 337, 338 fields: take the place of GMD (245 $h)

48Examples HandoutExample 3: Since RDA does not concern itself with display, a library could decide to capitalize all letters of the title properAlso note the inclusion of the creators titles something that isnt done in AACR2However the cataloger has the option of omitting information in the statement of responsibility

49Examples HandoutExample 5: Relationship of one expression to another -- a translation to its originalCatalogers option to use a relationship designator from RDA Appendix I in the 100 and 700 fieldsRDA allows you to create a 7xx field without mention as an attribute

50Examples HandoutExample 7: No more rule of three in RDAUp to the cataloger to decide how many creators are appropriate

51Looking at the RDA ToolkitNow that weve looked at some of RDAs instructions, lets see what the RDA Toolkit looks like