NISO Webinar: The Future of Integrated Library Systems PART 1: RDA & Cataloging

2,176 views

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,176
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
520
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
37
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I am very pleased to be with you today. I was asked to speak today on my thoughts for the potential that RDA has to transform our catalogs and library systems. A lot of people currently seem puzzled about what all the fuss is about. They see MARC records created using RDA, and while they do see differences from AACR2, they do not see the major transformation they either hoped for or dreaded. In fact, MARC bibliographic records created using RDA seem to some to be so similar to AACR2 that they wonder if it was worth the bother. I want to talk today about what our users’ experience with our databases might be like if we were able to go beyond MARC into the entity relationship environment that the authors of RDA envision. Most of us are not lucky enough to work in such a database today. I think we’ll all be interested to hear what John Espey has to say in the second half of this webinar about the VTLS system, which is designed with entity-relationship in mind.
  • The “entity-relationship” database model was first introduced in the 1970s. This model is widely used in database design, but until recently hasn’t been used extensively in library databases. In this model a specific database universe is defined, and this universe is divided into specific entities linked by specific relationships. An entity is something that can be distinctly identified within the context of the database. For example, a business database might define as entities “customers,” “employees,” “managers,” “stores,” “suppliers,” etc. A genealogical database might define as entities “persons,” “places,” “events.”A relationship is an association between two or more entities. A business database might define a relationship between a particular store and an employee. A genealogical database might define a “father-child” relationship between a male person and his children.In the model, entities and relationships are defined by attributes. An attribute is a characteristic that may identify instances of entities or relationships. For example, one of the attributes of a person is his or her birth date; other possible attributes for a person might be where he lives, his profession, his marital status, and so forth. Entity-relationship databases are designed with the entities, relationships, and attributes needed for the purpose of the database. A personnel database might need to define lots of attributes and relationships for persons (e.g., SSN, sex, marital status, position in the company, salary, etc.). A bibliographic database would not define all possible attributes and relationships for “person”, just those needed for the purposes of the database, such as name, possibly birth and death dates, relationship to works he/she created, etc. Most of our cataloging under RDA will consist of describing the attributes of these entities. A well-designed ER database should allow us to search using any of these aspects--we should be able to search for entities, we should be able to search for relationships, and we should be able to search using any attribute that has been defined for the database.
  • There are many different conventions of diagramming the entity-relationship model. One of the most basic methods is to use a rectangle for an entity, a diamond for a relationship, and an oval for an attribute. I have found this model to be the most convenient for describing an actual database, and so I will be using this diagramming technique during this presentation.
  • In this diagramming method entites, relationships, and attributes are linked by lines. The simplest version uses single lines, as shown here. To illustrate more complex situations other types of lines may be used, including lines with arrows at either end to show whether the relationship is reciprocal or not. In this presentation all of the diagrams will have the simple lines shown here. In the basic model both entities and relationships can have attributes, but in RDA, based on Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records or FRBR, attributes have only been defined for entities, so no attributes for relationships will be shown in this presentation. I point out in passing, however, that it might be useful to think about defining attributes for relationships, and in the MARC coding for certain RDA elements, some relationship attributes have been defined. For example, it is possible to code the time period when a person had a relationship with an institution. The time when a relationship existed is an attribute of the relationship, not of the entity.
  • As I mentioned, RDA is grounded in the model developed beginning with FRBR.Since I only have about 40 minutes to talk to you today, we don’t have time to talk about the entities in detail. I assume that most of you already are somewhat familiar with the FRBR entities. As a brief review, The entities in the FRBR model are divided into three groups. The first is defined as “the products of intellectual or artistic endeavor,” and the entities in this group are listed on this slide. [DON’T READ THE DEFINITIONS]Work: “a distinct intellectual or artistic creation”Expression: “intellectual or artistic realization of a work in the form of alpha-numeric, musical, or choreographic notation, sound, image,” etc.Manifestation: “the physical embodiment of an expression of a work”Item: “a single instance of a manifestation”--in other words, a copy
  • Although any entity in the model can be related to any other entity in a myriad of ways, these first four entities, also known as Group 1 or the Primary Entities, have a formal, hierarchical relationship to each other. This is how the primary entities are related to each other (read from slide)
  • The second group of entities are those responsible for creating intellectual or artistic content in Group 1 entities. FRBR/FRAD have defined three: Person, Family, Corporate body. DON’T READ THESE DEFINITIONS UNLESS ASKED:Person: “an individual or persona established or adopted by an individual or group”Family: “Two or more persons related by birth, marriage, adoption, or similar legal status, or who otherwise present themselves as a family.”Corporate body: “an organization or group of individuals and/or organizations acting as a unit”
  • Group 3 entities are entities that can be subjects of works, expressions, manifestations, or items. Any of the entities can be the subject of a work—for example a person entity, from group 2, could be the subject of a biography.The “new” entities in Group 3 are [DON’T READ THE DEFINITIONS]:Concept: “an abstract notion or idea”Object: “a material thing”Event: “an action or occurrence”Place: “a location”
  • In an entity-relationship database, each instance of an entity would be described once and only once. We might call this description an entity record. For instance, in the example shown on this slide, a record is created for the person Margaret Mitchell. Only the name attribute is shown here, but other attributes such as her birth and death dates, her profession, and so on, would be recorded within the record. This record would then be linked to related entities. On this slide we see that the person Margaret Mitchell is related to a work called “Gone with the Wind.” As with the person record for Mitchell, in our database a description or record for the work Gone with the wind would be created once and only once, and would contain all the attributes necessary to identify and describe this unique work. Notice specific relationships are identified. Margaret Mitchell has a creator relationship with the entity Gone with the Wind. The work has a “realized through” relationship with the two expression entities; the expression entities also have a relationship to each other--the German expression is a translation of the English expression. Finally, the German expression has a “translated by” relationship with another person entity, Martin Beheim-Schwarzbach.
  • FRBR is not a cataloging code, and so it does not define how the information is to be recorded. For example, “name of person” is one of the attributes of the “person” entity in FRBR. FRBR defines the attribute and points out that a person may be known by more than one name, and that libraries normally select one of the names as a uniform heading. But it does not tell us how to form the data to be recorded in this element, and if we are one of the libraries that wants to select one as a uniform heading, it does not tell us how to make that choice. That is the province of a cataloging code, such as RDA. RDA also defines attributes for entities, but because it is a cataloging code it also informs us how to record the data and in the case of the “name of person” attribute, it tells us how to choose between competing forms.An important point about RDA: the authors of RDA understood that most of us would not be able to implement RDA in an entity-relationship environment, so they created the code in a way that could be implemented in a number of different types of environments, including the current MARC environment. However, it is clear that RDA’s native environment is entity-relationship. So although I will refer to MARC in this presentation, I am going to act as though I am able to catalog in an ER database and will show you what I imagine these records might look like, how they might behave, and how they might interact with each other.
  • Let’s see what RDA has to say about the entity “person”.RDA defines several attributes of “person”. In RDA the act of recording attributes of an entity is referred to as “identifying” so RDA chapter 9 is called “Identifying Persons”. The guidelines begin with a scope note and general guidelines defining the entity, as you can see here. The central portion of each chapter consists of subsections detailing each attribute of the entity, including guidelines for recording the information. Finally, at the very end of each chapter, is a subsection detailing how to construct an access point to represent the entity. [Draw attention to 9.19.] It is extremely important that you understand this structure or you will get confused. The central subsections of the chapter do not necessarily have anything to do with the access point. They are intended to give guidance for recording attributes, not constructing an access point. In fact, in an ER database the concept of access point might actually wither away. We might want to think of it in this context as simply a label that might be displayed to the patron.
  • “Margaret Mitchell” is an instance of the “person” entity. Many of the RDA-defined attributes apply to her. How would we work RDA out in an ER database? On this slide the blue box represents the person entity. As I mentioned on the previous slide, the concept of “access point” might turn into simply a label in an ER database, so just for the sake of argument I’ve generated an access point form, following RDA. This could be entirely generated by the system itself using the information I’ve recorded as attributes in the green ovals. As a cataloger I don’t need to figure this out--the system can apply the guidelines of RDA 9.19 and generate the label. This blue box might be all the user sees at first; he or she would have the option of clicking through to see the fuller information recorded as attributes. The first RDA attribute is “name of person”. In this demonstration I have recorded the preferred name and one variant name. The preferred name is based on usage, and the name is recorded in inverted form as RDA instructs. Variant names can come from any source. In RDA a fuller form of name is not required to “fill out” elements already found in a preferred or variant name. Because Mitchell had a middle name, the fuller form of her forename is “Margaret Munnerlyn”. “Date associated with the person” is an element which RDA has subdivided into subelements: date of birth, date of death, and period of activity. The attribute “gender” in RDA can be recorded either “male” “female”, or “unknown”. Place of birth and language of the person are other possible attributes to record. RDA prescribes the forms shown. There are many other elements and subelements called for in RDA. Only a few are core or required. Preferred name and dates are core. Remember this doesn’t mean that dates necessarily have to be part of the access point. It just means they need to be recorded as an element of the RDA record if known. There are a few other elements that are core if needed to distinguish one person from another.
  • Here is one way I have imagined that we could create a description for a person. This is somewhat abbreviated--there are more possible elements or attributes that could be recorded using RDA. Everything in red I have filled out, following the rules and guidelines in RDA--I can’t just fill in the blanks however I like, it’s not a free for all. Note also that not all the elements are required. To reiterate, in this database structure I do not need to figure out what the access point form is. The system itself, following the rules, could take the information and put it together in the expected form. In this case, it has taken the information I’ve recorded in the preferred name field, added the fuller form, and added the year of birth and the year of death, to generate the access point. It could even add or subtract pieces depending on whether in the context of the database they were needed to distinguish between persons with the same name. So if there were no other Margaret Mitchells in the database the label might simply display “Mitchell, Margaret.”Now why doesn’t this work in a MARC environment? Why do I have to figure out the access point now? Because I have to put that exact form inside each bibliographic record that has any kind of relationship to Margaret Mitchell; and I have to make sure that the access points in all the bibliographic records are identical to each other, so the system can collocate them; but on the other hand each must be different from that of anybody else named Margaret Mitchell. This is very inefficient and prone to error. In ER, I would not have to worry about all bibliographic records containing the identical form because that form would not be there at all, it would only exist once, generated from the single description of the person, which would be linked to the work, expression, manifestation, or item record. The second concern, making sure this description was different from that of another person named Margaret Mitchell, would still exist, but again, this second person would have her own entity record, which would be used to generate the label, and which would be linked only to entities in the database that are appropriate to it.
  • For your information, all of this can more or less be squeezed into a MARC authority record, but it’s kind of uncomfortable; it’s been compared to pouring new wine into old bottles. What you see here is a MARC version of the same information I gave in the previous slide. It is possible to create a “person” entity record in MARC; but the basic overall structure of MARC, with a set of authority records, a set of bibliographic records, and possibly holdings records, all of which might or might not be linked to each other, is not friendly to ER.
  • Now let’s create a record for a work. The attributes, or elements, of the work entity are found in RDA chapter 6, “Identifying works and expressions.” Elements or attributes of work include title, form, date of the work (date the work was created), other distinguishing characteristic, and special guidelines for particular kinds of works like musical works. There are more elements and subelements defining work in RDA than there were for person, so I can’t fit them all on the screen, but these are enough to get us started. Let’s create a record for Gone with the wind using some of these elements. As with Person, the bulk of the chapter is information about recording the attributes or elements; the last piece, 6.27, tells how to create the access point. As I said before, in my imagined database structure, the cataloger would not need to do this, the system should be able to generate the access point or label from the information already recorded as attributes.One thing to note before we start: “Author” or “Creator” is not an attribute of work in RDA or FRBR. The author is a person, family, or corporate body, and as such is a separate entity with a relationship to the work. In a pure RDA work record the author’s name would not appear in the record, but the record instead would be linked to the record for the author. This is a dramatic difference from current MARC practice.
  • “The title of the work” element in RDA is subdivided into subelements “preferred title for the work” and “variant title for the work.” The preferred title is chosen as you would expect: choose the title by which the work is commonly known. I am not aware of any variant titles for this particular work, so this element isn’t recorded.Gone with the wind does have a form. It is a novel.We are instructed in RDA to record the date of the work, defined as the earliest date associated with the work. If we don’t know the complete history of the work, which we usually won’t, we can record the date the first expression of the work; this date in turn may be the first time the expression was published in a manifestation. In this case that would be 1936.History of the work is another possible element, as is summarization of the content (RDA 7.10)
  • Again, here’s a form a cataloger might see to record the attributes of a work. I filled in the red parts following the guidelines set down in RDA. The work record for the novel Gone with the wind would be linked to the person record for Margaret Mitchell in the database by a relationship RDA calls “created by”. This allows the system to generate a label following the guidelines in RDA 6.27, which calls for the access point or label to begin with the access point for the creater followed by the preferred title of the work. The system would draw this information from the attributes recorded in the two linked records. If this is not enough to distinguish this work from another (for example, if Margaret Mitchell also wrote a poem with the same title), the system could draw on another attribute to add something to make the labels different. In this instance, probably the form of work “novel” would be added to the system generated label.
  • So here’s our database so far. The user presumably could click on either of the boxes to see the full description of the entity if desired. The beauty of this is that I never need to touch these descriptions again unless there is a mistake or I want to add something to them. In the future, all I need to do is link new records for other entities to the appropriate description.
  • Now for the sake of time I’m going to quickly build up the database. Each blue box has behind it a description that the user could access if desired, like the ones I created for Mitchell and Gone with the wind. The labels are generated by the system using the information recorded in each entity description or the entities it’s linked to. Regarding the Spanish translation, the database has another Spanish translation; when the system detects this (because it would also be linked to the same work record) it adds the name of the translators to the label to distinguish between the two. These access point labels get a little unwieldy and possibly once we’re in this environment RDA could be revised.
  • Once we’ve built up the database all I have to do when I add a new publication is link it to the existing record. So in this case, suppose my library receives a copy of the first English edition. All I need to do is create a record for the manifestation following the instructions in RDA Chapter 2. This includes recording attributes such as title, statement of responsibility, edition statement, place of publication, and so on. Notice that once the structure is in place, there really isn’t a lot to record for the manifestation--this is much less work than we’re used to doing when creating a MARC bibliographic record. There isn’t a system generated access point or label because RDA hasn’t yet developed access points for manifestations, although this is coming. Instead the system might generate some other display, such as ...
  • ... a display that gives the carrier type (labeled “format”) and the publication information, and possibly the edition statement if there is one.
  • Every time the Library gets a new edition, all I have to do is link in another manifestation record.
  • And another. OK. You get the idea. Now what should we be able to do with this database?
  • First, the user should be able to navigate easily through the increasingly complex information universe in our databases. Currently when the user types in “gone with the wind” he or she typically gets a whole bunch of records somewhat randomly ordered, though we might claim to be applying “relevancy” ranking, for whatever that might be worth to the individual user. In an ER database the user might instead navigate through layers of links. So the query “gone with the wind” might produce this constellation of work records which the system found by searching in the title attributes of work records. [Briefly talk about each one]
  • The user decides she wants the original novel, and clicks on the work.
  • The user might next be given a choice of expressions. No doubt our database would have more than this, but there’s only so much room in a PowerPoint slide.
  • The user decides she wants an audio version.
  • The user discovers that a copy is conveniently available; ...
  • ... she goes to the Media Center and obtains the Playaway version of this Gone with the wind audiobook. There are surely better ways to display this information, but the point is to show how a user might navigate through an entity-relationship database.
  • What else should the user be able to do? First the user should be able to retrieve entity descriptions or records by searching for any of the attributes. We’ve already seen an instance of the user looking for the work Gone with the wind. The system retrieved the work records by zeroing in on “title of work” attributes, which might include the preferred title or any variant titles. Any attribute should be searchable. Let’s say the user likes Gone with the wind and would like to find other works by Georgia women authors. The system should allow us to search based on these attributes. Margaret Mitchell qualifies.
  • So does Flannery O’Connor
  • And Alice Walker
  • And Caroline Miller.
  • The user should be able to make a query such as this, perhaps assisted by dropdown lists or pre-filled in search terms, and get a result such as this: ...
  • From here the user should be able to click through to related entities, including works the person is associated with. Now this, of course, assumes that catalogers are going to fully record the needed attributes, and do it in a standardized way. RDA is leading the way, but results will depend on how it is implemented.
  • It should be possible to retrieve information from the database not only by searching on attributes, but also by searching on relationships. For example, one relationship that is important in special collections research is that of printers to the manifestations they produce. Researchers working on history of printing want to know the output of a particular press, or all the printers represented in a collection. It should be possible to retrieve this information if a collection’s database is constructed on ER principles and the information has been included in the database. This slide shows an example of this relationship specified in the database. Probably only specialized libraries would bring out this relationship, but this is how it would be done.
  • There are a lot of relationships, but the number is limited and a drop-down list might be navigable in a search. I’ve listed only a few of the RDA relationships here. The database user should be able to choose one and find all the instances of thatin the database. In this case the user chooses “printer” and would retrieve a list of entities that have a printer relationship with a manifestation represented in the database.
  • From here the user should be able to click through to entities to which it is related by the “printer” relationship.
  • The user should be able to combine attribute searches with relationship searches. For example, suppose a user enjoys reading science fiction by Russian authors, and would like to know what the library has in English. The database should be able to retrieve this information if the library has been coding the information into the database. Here we have an example of the type of work wanted. This work, by Russian author Victor Kolupaev, is both an example of science fiction and has an expression in English.To find other examples of Russian science fiction translated into English, the system needs to perform three operations:1. It needs to find work records that are linked to Russian authors by the created by link.2. From that group it needs to find work records that are linked to the concept science fiction by the genre link.3. From that group it needs to find work records that are linked to expression records with the attribute “English.”Each of these steps entails both a relationship search and an attribute search.
  • The system should first be able to retrieve Russian authors. The system would do this by searching for Russia in the “place” attributes of person entities, just as it searched for women authors from Georgia, possibly combined with the language of the person. Here the entity record for Kolupaev has this information. The database retrieves all person entity records with this information.
  • This set of Russian authors must be linked to the target work set by the creator relationship.
  • Next the system should be able to find the set of works that both have a created by relationship with a Russian author and a genre relationship with the concept science fiction. The system looks for the attribute “science fiction” in concept entity records; and
  • They must be linked to the target work set by the genre relationship.
  • Finally, the system must further limit the search by English language, which would be an attribute search of expression entities linked to the target set of works. The system would finally present with a set of English-language expressions of science fiction works by Russian authors.
  • From here the user should be able to click through to the manifestations available. Now obviously this is a very complex search, and probably our users should not be expected to execute it manually themselves. I am not a database designer, so the way we got here might not be the best way. What is important is the end result--the user finds Russian science fiction in English translation. How the system gets there could be opaque to the user--but it should be able to get to this result, or any other desired result that the user might need. However, if the underlying database structure isn’t there--which it isn’t now in our MARC databases--such searches will not be possible.
  • So that’s my simple wish list. Easy navigability; more efficient cataloging; ability to retrieve by any attribute or relationship or any combination.How do we get there? First we need to implement RDA, and we need to have agreement among the builders of the database, the cataloging community, that we will fully use the new elements in the entity descriptions and will record them in a standardized way to facilitate retrieval.Next, we need to design a working entity-relationship database that can be implemented at all levels, from OCLC to local ILSs.Finally, we need to figure out how to deal with the millions of legacy MARC records. This is not an easy task.We’ll next hear from John Espy of VTLS to see what they’re up to in developing such a database. But meanwhile, we may have a few minutes for some questions.
  • .
  • NISO Webinar: The Future of Integrated Library Systems PART 1: RDA & Cataloging

    1. 1. http://www.niso.org/news/events/2011/nisowebinars/rda/ The Future of Integrated Library Systems Part One: RDA & Cataloging May 11, 2011Speakers: Robert Maxwell & John Espley
    2. 2. The Future of the ILS : The Potential of RDA NISO Webinar May 11, 2011 Robert L. MaxwellChair, Special Collections and Formats Catalog Department Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University Provo, Utah, U.S.A.
    3. 3. Entity-Relationship Model• Entity: Something that can be distinctly identified.• Relationship: An association between two or more entities.• Attribute: A characteristic that may identify instances of entities or relationships.
    4. 4. Entity-Relationship Diagramming• Entities Entity• Relationships Relationship• Attributes Attribute
    5. 5. Entity-Relationship Diagramming Attribute 1 Entity 1 Attribute 2 Relationship Attribute 1 Attribute 2 Entity 2
    6. 6. FRBR Entities• Group 1: The products of intellectual or artistic endeavor. Sometimes called “the primary entities.” – Work: a distinct intellectual or artistic creation – Expression: the intellectual or artistic realization of a work in some form (e.g. alpha-numeric, musical notation) – Manifestation: the physical embodiment of an expression (e.g. a print publication) – Item: a copy of a manifestation
    7. 7. FRBR Relationships (Group 1)Work realized through Expression embodied in Manifestation exemplified by Item
    8. 8. FRBR/FRAD Entities• Group 2: entities responsible for Group 1 entities – Person – Family – Corporate body
    9. 9. FRBR Entities• Group 3: entities that can be subjects of works – Any group 1 or group 2 entity, and – Concept – Object – Event – Place
    10. 10. FRBR Relationships (Gps 1-2) Work: Gone with the wind created Person: Margaret Mitchell by realized through Expression: 1st GermanExpression: 1st English expression Expression has a translation Person: Martin Beheim- translated by Schwarzbach
    11. 11. FRBR/RDA Attributes• FRBR, a model, defines attributes, but does not tell us how to record the data• RDA, a cataloging code, defines attributes and does tell us how to record the data
    12. 12. Attributes of Personin RDA
    13. 13. Person Entity AttributesPerson : Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949 Preferred name: Mitchell, Margaret Fuller form of name: Margaret Munnerlyn Variant name: Marsh, John Robert, Mrs. Date of birth: 1900 November 8 Date of death: 1949 August 16 Gender: female Place of birth: Atlanta, Ga. Language of the person: English
    14. 14. Possible Cataloger FormPerson descriptionPreferred name: Mitchell, MargaretFuller form : Margaret MunnerlynVariant name: Marsh, John Robert, Mrs.Date of birth: 1900 November 8Date of death: 1949 August 16 Country associated with person: U.S.Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person: EnglishPlace of birth: Atlanta, Ga. Affiliation:Place of death: System-generated label: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949
    15. 15. Person Entity Attributes (MARC)046 $f 19001108 $g 19490816100 1 $a Mitchell, Margaret $q (Margaret Munnerlyn), $d 1900- 1949400 1 $a Marsh, John Robert, $c Mrs., $d 1900-1949370 $a Atlanta, Ga. $c U.S.372 $a American literature374 $a author375 $a female377 $a eng
    16. 16. Attributes ofWork in RDA
    17. 17. Work Entity AttributesWork (Gone with the wind) Preferred title: Gone with the wind Form of work: Novel Date of work: 1936 History of the work: Romantic novel first published in May 1936; it won the Pulitzer Prize in 1937. Summarization of the content: Scarlett O’Hara, the spoiled daughter of a well-to-do plantation owner, must overcome the challenges facing the South during and after the Civil War
    18. 18. Possible Cataloger FormWork descriptionPreferred title: Gone with the windVariant title:Form of work: novelDate of work: 1936Place of origin:Other distinguishing characteristic:History of the work: Romantic novel first published in May 1936; it won the Pulitzer Prize in 1937.Summarization of the content: Scarlett O’Hara, the spoiled daughter of a well-to-do plantation owner, must overcome the challenges facing the South during and after the Civil War. System-generated label: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind
    19. 19. ER DatabaseWork: Mitchell, Margaret Person: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), created (Margaret Munnerlyn),1900-1949. Gone with the by 1900-1949. wind
    20. 20. ER Database Person: Mitchell, MargaretWork: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), created (Margaret Munnerlyn),1900-1949. Gone with the by 1900-1949. wind Expression: Mitchell, realized through Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Expression: Mitchell, Gone with the wind. Margaret (Margaret has a Spanish (Luaces andMunnerlyn), 1900-1949. translation Gómez de la Serna) Gone with the wind. English translated by Person: Luaces, Juan G. de Person: mez de la Serna, Julio
    21. 21. Possible Cataloger FormManifestation descriptionTitle proper: Gone with the windStatement of responsibility: Margaret MitchellEdition statement: [First edition]Place of publication: New York, NYPublisher’s name: MacmillanDate of publication: 1936Copyright date: ©1936Series statement:Carrier type: volumeExtent: 1037 pagesDimensions:22 cmIdentifier (ISBN):
    22. 22. ER Database Person: Mitchell, MargaretWork: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), created (Margaret Munnerlyn),1900-1949. Gone with the by 1900-1949. wind realized through Expression: Mitchell, embodied in Margaret (MargaretMunnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. English Manifestation: Format: volume Publisher: New York, NY : Macmillan, 1936 Edition: [First edition]
    23. 23. ER Database Person: Mitchell, MargaretWork: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), created (Margaret1900-1949. Gone with the by Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. wind realized through Expression: Mitchell, embodied in Margaret (MargaretMunnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. English Manifestation: Format: volume Manifestation: Publisher: New York : Scribner, Format: volume 2011 Publisher: New York, NY : Edition: 75th anniversary Macmillan, 1936 edition Edition: [First edition]
    24. 24. ER Database Person: Mitchell, MargaretWork: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), created (Margaret Munnerlyn),1900-1949. Gone with the by 1900-1949. wind Manifestation: realized through Format: volume Publisher: New York : Macmillan, 1961 Expression: Mitchell, embodied in Margaret (Margaret Edition: Anniversary editionMunnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. English Manifestation: Format: volume Manifestation: Publisher: New York : Scribner, Format: volume 2011 Publisher: New York, NY : Edition: 75th anniversary Macmillan, 1936 edition Edition: [First edition]
    25. 25. ER Database Navigation Work: Cameron, Judy. The art of Gone with the wind. has a subject Work: Mitchell, Margaret Derived (Margaret Munnerlyn), from 1900-1949. Gone with the wind.Work: Gone with the wind (Motion picture) Parody of has a subject Work: Randall, Alice, 1959- The wind done gone. Work: Haskell, Molly. Frankly, my dear : Gone with the wind revisited.
    26. 26. ER Database Navigation Work: Cameron, Judy. The art of Gone with the wind. has a subject Work: Mitchell, Margaret Derived (Margaret Munnerlyn), from 1900-1949. Gone with the wind.Work: Gone with the wind (Motion picture) Parody of has a subject Work: Randall, Alice, 1959- The wind done gone. Work: Haskell, Molly. Frankly, my dear : Gone with the wind revisited.
    27. 27. ER Database Navigation Work: Mitchell, Margaret Expression: Mitchell, (Margaret Munnerlyn), Margaret (Margaret 1900-1949. Gone with the Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. wind. Gone with the wind. Expression: Mitchell, Spanish (Luaces and Margaret (Margaret Gómez de la Serna)Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. realized through Gone with the wind. English (Text) Expression: Mitchell, Expression: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. Gone with the wind. English (Spoken word) Spanish (Cané F.)
    28. 28. ER Database Navigation Work: Mitchell, Margaret Expression: Mitchell, (Margaret Munnerlyn), Margaret (Margaret 1900-1949. Gone with the Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. wind. Gone with the wind. Expression: Spanish (Luaces and Mitchell, Margaret Gómez de la Serna) (Margaret realized throughMunnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. English (Text) Expression: Mitchell, Expression: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. Gone with the wind. Gone with the wind. English (Spoken word) Spanish (Cané F.)
    29. 29. ER Database Navigation Expression: Mitchell, Manifestation: Margaret (Margaret Format: Playaway Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. embodied in Publisher: Playaway, Gone with the wind. ©2009 English (Spoken word) exemplified by Item: copy in Main Library at Special Collections Desk.Item: copy in Main Library at Media Center Desk. Accession no. G23900 Accession no. G23900 Does not circulate. May be used Item: copy in Main Library at 2-week circulation. Media Center Desk. in Reading Room. Status: CHECKED OUT Accession no. G23901 2-week circulation. Status: AVAILABLE
    30. 30. ER Database Navigation Expression: Mitchell, Manifestation: Margaret (Margaret Format: Playaway Munnerlyn), 1900-1949. embodied in Publisher: Playaway, Gone with the wind. ©2009 English (Spoken word) exemplified by Item: copy in Main Library at Special Collections Desk.Item: copy in Main Library at Media Center Desk. Accession no. G23900 Accession no. G23900 Does not circulate. May be used Item: copy in Main Library at 2-week circulation. Media Center Desk. in Reading Room. Status: CHECKED OUT Accession no. G23901 2-week circulation. Status: AVAILABLE
    31. 31. ER Database RetrievalPerson descriptionPreferred name: Mitchell, MargaretFuller form : Margaret MunnerlynVariant name: Marsh, John Robert, Mrs.Date of birth: 1900 November 8Date of death: 1949 August 16 Country associated with person: U.S.Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person: EnglishPlace of birth: Atlanta, Ga. Affiliation:Place of death: System-generated label: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949
    32. 32. ER Database RetrievalPerson descriptionPreferred name: O’Connor, FlanneryFuller form : Mary FlanneryVariant name: O’Connor, Mary FlanneryDate of birth: 1925 March 25Date of death: 1964 August 3 Country associated with person: U.S.Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person: EnglishPlace of birth: Savannah, Ga. Affiliation:Place of death: Milledgeville, Ga. System-generated label: O’Connor, Flannery (Mary Flannery), 1925-1964
    33. 33. ER Database RetrievalPerson descriptionPreferred name: Walker, AliceFuller form : Alice MalseniorVariant name: Leventhal, Alice WalkerDate of birth: 1944 February 9Date of death: Country associated with person: U.S.Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person: EnglishPlace of birth: Eatonton, Ga. Affiliation:Place of death: System-generated label: Walker, Alice (Alice Malsenior), 1944-
    34. 34. ER Database RetrievalPerson descriptionPreferred name: Miller, CarolineFuller form : Caroline PaffordVariant name:Date of birth: 1903 August 26Date of death: 1992 July 12 Country associated with person: U.S.Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person: EnglishPlace of birth: Waycross, Ga. Affiliation:Place of death: Waynesville, N.C. System-generated label: Miller, Caroline (Caroline Pafford), 1903-1992
    35. 35. ER Database RetrievalDatabase SearchPreferred name:Fuller form :Variant name:Date of birth:Date of death: Country associated with person:Period of activity: Field of activity: American literatureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: female Language of the person:Place associated with person: Ga. Affiliation:
    36. 36. ER Database RetrievalGeorgia women authors in the Library CollectionPerson: Miller, Caroline (Caroline Pafford), 1903-1992.Person: Mitchell, Margaret (Margaret Munnerlyn), 1900-1949.Person: O’Connor, Flannery (Mary Flannery), 1925-1964.Person: Walker, Alice (Alice Malsenior), 1944-
    37. 37. ER Database Retrieval Expression: Le Guin, Ursula Manifestation: K., 1929- Direction of the Format: volume road. English embodied inPublisher: Foolscap Press, 2007 printer Corporate body: Foolscap Press
    38. 38. ER Database RetrievalDatabase Relationship Search ... composer choreographer creatorChoose a relationship editor film directorto retrieve: film producer illustrator performer printer television producer ...
    39. 39. ER Database RetrievalPrinters in the Library Collection ...Person: Fontana, Antonio.Corporate body: Foolscap Press.Person: Ford, John.Corporate body: Fortune Press. ...
    40. 40. ER Database Retrieval Work: Kolupaev, Viktor Person: Kolupaev, ViktorDmitrievich, 1936- Kacheli created Dmitrievich, 1936- otsheloika by realized through has a genre Expression: Kolupaev,Viktor Dmitrievich, 1936-Kacheli otsheloika. English Concept: Science fiction
    41. 41. ER Database RetrievalPerson descriptionPreferred name: Kolupaev, Victor DmitrievichFuller form :Variant name: Kolupayev, VictorDate of birth: 1936 September 19Date of death: 2001 June 4 Country associated with person: RussiaPeriod of activity: Field of activity: RussianliteratureTitle: Profession: authorOther designation: Biographical information:Gender: male Language of the person: RussianPlace of birth: Sakha, Russia Affiliation:Place of death: System-generated label: Kolupaev, Victor Dmitrievich , 1936-2001
    42. 42. ER Database RetrievalDatabase Relationship Search ... composer choreographer creatorChoose a relationship editor film directorto retrieve: film producer illustrator performer printer television producer ...
    43. 43. ER Database Retrieval Person: [set of Russian created person entities] byWork: [Target set] has a genre Concept: Science fiction
    44. 44. ER Database RetrievalDatabase Relationship Search ... Road fiction Romances clefChoose a genre Romantic suspense fiction Science fictionto retrieve: Science fiction films Science fiction radio programs Sea stories Short films ...
    45. 45. ER Database Retrieval Person: [set of Russian created person entities] by Work: [Target set] realized through has a genre Expression: [English-language expressions] Concept: Science fiction
    46. 46. ER Database RetrievalRussian science fiction in English translation in the Library Collection ...Expression: Bulgakov, Mikhail Afanasevich, 1891-1940. Rokovye iaitsa. English. Manifestation: The fatal eggs. London, 2003.Expression: Bulychev, K. (Kirill). Li͡udi and Chudesa v Gusli͡are. English. Manifestation: Half a life, and other stories. New York, 1977.Expression: Kolupaev, Viktor Dmitrievich, 1936- Kacheli otsheloika. English. Manifestation: Hermit’s swing. New York, 1980.Expression: Strugat͡skiĭ, Arkadiĭ Natanovich. Dalekai͡a raduga. English. Manifestation: Far rainbow. New York, 1979. ...
    47. 47. How do we get there?• Implement RDA – Agree to include attributes in entity descriptions that will allow for accurate retrieval• Design a working Entity-Relationship database structure• Devise ways to deal with legacy MARC data
    48. 48. The Future of the ILS : The Potential of RDANISO Webinar May 11, 2011 Robert L. Maxwell robert_maxwell@byu.edu
    49. 49. The Future of ILS:What an Ideal ILS Might Look Like John Espley NISO Webinar May 11, 2011
    50. 50. Overview1. RDA Implementation Scenarios2. RDA Workflow3. Simpler RDA Cataloging4. VTLS RDA/FRBR Extensions5. Cataloging Assistance
    51. 51. RDA• Implementation scenarios Number 3 – Flat file data structure Number 2 – Linked bibliographic and authority records Number 1 – Relational/Object oriented data structure The system of the future!
    52. 52. RDA WorkflowImplementation Scenario 1 the future Create Work Add Expression Add Manifestation Add Item/HoldingsLater, when additional Manifestations are acquired  Add Expression, if needed  Add Manifestation
    53. 53. Metadata and RDA• MARC Dead?• Dublin Core• MODS• XML• RDA Vocabularies• Many others• Metadata Management System
    54. 54. RDA Work RecordPreferred title Form of work Date of workAuthorized access point associated with work Primary SecondaryNotesSubjects Concept, Object, Event, Place
    55. 55. RDA Expression Record Content type Language of Expression Date of Expression Other distinguishing characteristics Notes Authorized access point associated with Expression
    56. 56. RDA Manifestation Record Title proper Statement of responsibility Edition statement Publication statement Place, publisher, date Series statement Notes Media type Carrier type Extent
    57. 57. RDA Work template
    58. 58. RDA Work record
    59. 59. Display Work record
    60. 60. 1.10 RDA Expression Template
    61. 61. Display RDA Work and Expression
    62. 62. Add RDA Manifestation
    63. 63. RDA Manifestation Template
    64. 64. RDA Manifestation record
    65. 65. Work, Expression, Manifestation
    66. 66. Simpler RDA CatalogingWhen additional Manifestations are acquired  Add Expression, if needed • Different language • Different performance • Different content type Text, Spoken word, Performed music, etc. • Different text  Add Manifestation
    67. 67. Adding a new RDA Manifestation
    68. 68. A new RDA Manifestation
    69. 69. Two RDA Manifestations
    70. 70. The other RDA Manifestation
    71. 71. A new RDA Expression
    72. 72. New RDA Expression
    73. 73. New RDA Expression
    74. 74. Add French RDA Manifestation
    75. 75. French RDA Manifestation
    76. 76. Two RDA Expressions
    77. 77. Display of Selected RDA Work
    78. 78. Expanding the Display
    79. 79. Further expanding the display
    80. 80. VTLS RDA/FRBR ExtensionsRelated Works  Super Works  Derivative WorksReverse trees for better navigation  Aggregates
    81. 81. Related WorksA motion picture based on a novel is a new workA new play derived from a work  Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead by Tom StoppardNeed to relate the new work to the original workSuper Work or Derivative Work technique  Super Work means all related Works are equal  Derivative Work means related Works are subordinate to original Work
    82. 82. Derivative Work Technique
    83. 83. Super Work technique
    84. 84. “Normal” and “Reverse” Trees
    85. 85. “Normal” Tree
    86. 86. “Reverse” Tree
    87. 87. “Reverse” Tree
    88. 88. “Reverse” Tree
    89. 89. “Normal” Tree
    90. 90. RDA Cataloging AssistanceCataloging assistance  Templates for original cataloging  RDA Toolkit  Macros  MARC content designation validation  Authority record templates
    91. 91. Questions? Thank you!

    ×