Tillett, Hillmann, and Moen, "Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC"

Visit the event website for:
•Event slides
•Event Q&A
•Additional Resources
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/bibcontrol09/
NISO Webinar • October 14, 2009
Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup:
AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC
• Introduction
– Karen A. Wetzel, Standards Program Manager, NISO
• AACR2, RDA, VIAF, and the Future: From There to Here to There
– Barbara Tillett, Chief, Policy and Standards Division, Library of
Congress
• RDA Elements and Vocabularies: a Step Forward from MARC
– Diane Hillmann, Director of Metadata Initiatives, Information
Institute of Syracuse
• Data-driven Evidence for Core MARC Records
– William Moen, Associate Professor, School of Library and
Information Sciences, University of North Texas
• Q&A Session
NISO 2009 Events
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/
•November 9 (NISO Open Teleconference):
DAISY Update - free!
•November 11 (NISO Webinar):
Data, Data Everywhere: Migration and
System Population Practices
•December 9 (NISO Webinar):
ONIX for Publication Licenses:
Adding Structure to Legalese
•December 14 (NISO Open Teleconference):
ISO TC 46 / SC 11 (Archives/record
management subcommittee) Update - free!
AACR2, RDA, VIAF,
and the future
(from there to here to there)
by Dr. Barbara B. Tillett
Chief, Policy and Standards Division
Library of Congress
for NISO Webinar
Oct. 14, 2009
Overview
!There – Past cataloging rules and
cataloging environments
!Here – Bridge period with transition to new
approach
!There – Future views of cataloging data and
re-use of that data
Bibliographic Universe

Bibliographic Universe
Anglo-American Tradition
1841
1876
1902
1904
1906
1908
1941
1949
IFLA’s Influence on
Cataloguing Codes
1961
“Paris
Principles”
1841
1876
1902
1904
1906
1908
1941
1949
1967
MARC Formats, 1969+ More of IFLA’s Influence
1969 + ISBDs
• International Standard Bibliographic
Description
• 2007
Consolidated
edition

1841
1876
1902
1904
1906
1908
1941
1949
1967
1978
1998
1988
2002
-2005
! User tasks
• Find
• Identify
• Select
• Obtain
! Entity-relationship model
• Entities: Group 1, 2, 3
• Relationships
• Attributes
! National level record
elements (mandatory & optional data)
Functional Requirements for
Bibliographic Records (FRBR)
1997 International Conference on the
Principles and Future Development of
AACR
!Toronto, Canada
!JSC invited
worldwide experts
!Issues leading to
RDA
!Principles
!Content vs. carrier
!Logical structure of
AACR
!Seriality
!Internationalization
International Cataloguing Principles
(ICP)
~320 cataloguing experts and rule making bodies
5 regional meetings, 2003-2007
International Cataloguing Principles
(ICP)
! 20 languages
! http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/
statement-of-international-cataloguing-
principles
! Principles
! Glossary
! Background on the IME ICC Process
! Pictures of participants
! Acknowledgements
General Principles (ICP)
• Convenience of user
• Representation
• Common usage
• Accuracy
• Sufficiency and
necessity
• Significance
• Economy
• Consistency and
Standardization
• Integration
• Defensible, not arbitrary
• If contradict, take a
defensible, practical
solution.

JSC Collaborations with other
Metadata Communities
!ONIX (Publishers) – types of content, media, carriers
!RDA, Dublin Core, IEEE/LOM, Semantic Web
"“Data Modeling Meeting” - London 2007
!RDA/MARC Working Group (MARBI)
TOOLS RESOURCES
RDA Structure
!General introduction
!Elements (Entities and their attributes)
!Relationships
#Appendices
!Capitalization, Abbreviations, Initial articles, etc.
!Presentation (ISBD, MARC, etc.)
!Relationship designators
!Etc.
#Glossary
#Index
Transcription – Principle of
!“Take what you see”
"Correction of inaccuracies elsewhere
"No more abbreviating (but take abbreviations
found on the resource)
!Accept what you get
"Facilitating automated data capture
Sample Changes from AACR2
!Transcribed data (macros and templates)
"Option to keep rule of 3
!e.g., “[and five others]” – no more “… et. al.”
"First place of publication is “core”
"“Place of publication not identified” – not “s.l.”
"“Publisher not identified” – not “s.n.”
"“Date of publication not identified”
!General Material Designator $ ONIX/RDA
(icons?)
"Content type
!e.g., notated music, performed music, sounds, spoken
word, text, still image, two-dimensional moving image
(MARC 336)
"Media type
!e.g., audio, computer, microform, projected,
unmediated, video (MARC 337)
"Carrier type
!e.g., audio disc, online resource, microfiche, volume,
object, videodisc (MARC 338)

!Access points (transition)
"Bible
"Treaties
"No more “Polyglot”
"More data in authority records
US RDA Test
http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/
FRBR Collocation
!Objectives of a
catalog: display
! All the works
associated with a
person, etc.
! All the expressions of
the same work
! All the manifestations
of the same
expression
! All items/copies of the
same manifestation
!"#$%&
'&()*+($#
,--.
/01$23+
'4%523+
67%0)+
8%7#"0
'+"*%39%"7%
:2;7"7<=(>=?(017%33
?(9<=@
87%%0=$%"&+%7=;205201
A(#%(="05
BC$2%&
Pathways to Related Works
!"#$%&
'&()*+($#
,--.
/01$23+
'4%523+
67%0)+
8%7#"0
'+"*%39%"7%
:2;7"7<=(>=?(017%33
?(9<=@
87%%0=$%"&+%7=;205201
A(#%(="05
BC$2%&
'&(99"75
A(3%0)7"0&D=E=8C2$5%03&%70=
F7%=G%"5
H%I&
J(K2%3
L
G%72K"&2K%
====4(7*3
'C;M%)&
http://www.rda-jsc.org/
What’s changing?
!Changes in technology
!Change in focus: Move from individual library
to international audience
!Change of view: Move from classes of
materials in libraries to elements and
relationships for entities in bibliographic
universe
"More controlled vocabularies
"More re-use of metadata beyond libraries

Internet
!Catalogs are no longer in isolation
"Global access to data
!Integrate bibliographic data with
wider Internet environment
"Share data beyond institutions
Internet
“Cloud”
Databases,
Repositories
Web front
end
Services
N-
“Bridge” Period – Building Blocks
%Clearly identify the data:
New MARC coding and mapping tables for RDA and
MARC, Dublin Core, MODS/MADS, and ISBD
%Register controlled vocabularies on the Web:
RDA/ONIX controlled lists (e.g., content, media, &
carrier types)
VIAF name authority data <viaf.org>
LCSH/SKOS <id.loc.gov/authorities>
%Develop next generation systems:
ILS, more sophisticated search engines, more open
source and linked data structures
Database/format Scenarios
Bib record (flat-file)
Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
Spoken word.
1 sound disc
1. Metadata
Donated by the author.
BasedonGordonDunsire’sslide
Z
666.7
.L55
2009
Bib record (flat-file)
100 01 $a Lee, T. B.
245 00 $a Cataloguing has a future
500 $a Spoken word.
300 $a 1 sound disc
650 0 $a Metadata
561 1 $a Donated by the author.
View the animated flash slide at:
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/bibcontrol09/slide1.swf

Author:
Title:
Content type:
Carrier type:
Provenance:
Subject:
Lee, T. B.
Cataloguing has a future
Audio disc
Metadata
Donated by the author
Name authority record
Name:
Subject authority record
Identifier: …
Label:
Identifier: …
Item information
Manifestation information
Expression information
Work information
RDA content type registry
Label:
Identifier: …
Spoken word
RDA carrier type registry
Linked Data
Work Title: Cataloguing has a futureCataloguing has a future
Package for Data Sharing
View the animated flash slide at:
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/bibcontrol09/slide2.swf
AACR2
WWW
FRBR
FRAD
ISBD
ICP
JSC
SKO
S
viaf

Contact Information
Barbara Tillett
btil@loc.gov
+1 (202) 707-4714
Resource Description and Access: Background/Overview.
(May 14, 2008. 67 minutes) http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/
feature_wdesc.php?rec=4320
Cataloging Principles and RDA: Resource Description and
Access. (June 10, 2008. 49 minutes) http://www.loc.gov/today/
cyberlc/feature_wdesc.php?rec=4327
FRBR: Things You Should Know but Were Afraid to Ask. (March
4, 2009. 57 minutes) http://www.loc.gov/today/cyberlc/
feature_wdesc.php?rec=4554
LC Webcasts
JSC Sources
!Element analysis table
!Changes from AACR2
!Issues deferred until after the first release
!Mappings to MARC, etc.
http://www.rda-jsc.org/
!"#!$#"% &'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% 9'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268

!"#!$#"% $'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% :'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
!"#!$#"% ;'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
O7(9%7&<=P8%0%7"$2D%5Q=0(=6ARA=7%$"&2(03+29S
'C;97(9%7&<=P42&+=7%$"&2(03+29=&(=(0%=6ARA=%0&2&<S
6ARA=/0&2&<
Semantic
Web
Library Applications
The Simple Case:
One Property--
One FRBR Entity
!"#!$#"% <'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
R((*=>(7#"&
R((*=>(7#"&=PJ"02>%3&"&2(0S
6ARATJ"02>%3&"&2(0
Semantic
Web
Library Applications
The Simple Case:
One Property--
One FRBR Entity
!"#!$#"% ='()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
O7(9%7&<=P8%0%7"$2D%5Q=0(=6ARA=7%$"&2(03+29S
'C;97(9%7&<=P42&+=7%$"&2(03+29=&(=(0%=6ARA=%0&2&<S
'C;97(9%7&<=P42&+=7%$"&2(03+29=&(=(0%=6ARA=%0&2&<S
6ARA=/0&2&<
6ARA=/0&2&<
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Not-So-Simple Case:
One Property—more than
One FRBR Entity
!"#!$#"% %'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268

/I&%0&
/I&%0&=PU&%#S
/I&%0&=PJ"02>%3&"&2(0S
6ARATU&%#
6ARATJ"02>%3&"&2(0
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Not-So-Simple Case:
One Property—more than
One FRBR Entity
!"#!$#"% !"'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% !!'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
!"#!$#"% !&'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% !9'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
F117%1"&%5='&"&%#%0&=P0(=5(#"20=(7=7"01%S
F117%1"&%5='&"&%#%0&='C;97(9%7&<
A"01%T=AGF='<0&"I=/0)(5201=')+%#%=P'C;)$"33=
(>=AG6=G"&"&<9%S
G(#"20T=6ARA=/0&2&<
A"01%T=V'9%)2W)X=/0)(5201=')+%#%=P'C;)$"33S
8%0%7"$=O7(9%7&<=P0(=5(#"20=(7=7"01%S
'C;97(9%7&<
Pre-coordinated Statements: Structure
Option 1
!"#!$#"% !$'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
OC;$2)"&2(0='&"&%#%0&=P0(=5(#"20=(7=7"01%S
OC;$2)"&2(0='&"&%#%0&=PJ"02>%3&"&2(0S
A"01%T=AGF='<0&"I=/0)(5201=')+%#%=P'C;)$"33=(>=
AG6=G"&"&<9%S
G(#"20T=J"02>%3&"&2(0
A"01%T=OC;$2)"&2(0='&"&%#%0&=/0)(5201=
')+%#%=P'C;)$"33S
O$")%=(>=9C;$2)"&2(0=P0(=5(#"20=(7=7"01%S
O$")%=(>=9C;$2)"&2(0=PJ"02>%3&"&2(0S
Pre-coordinated Statements: Example
Option 1
!"#!$#"% !:'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268

!"#!$#"% !;'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
Y'C9%7Z=O7(9%7&<=
'C;97(9%7&<=P42&+=7%$"&2(03+29=&(=(0%=6ARA=%0&2&<S
'C;97(9%7&<=P8%0%7"$2D%5Q=0(=6ARA=7%$"&2(03+29S
6ARA=/0&2&<
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Roles Case:
Properties, Subproperties
and FRBR Entities
Mapping,
Etc.
!"#!$#"% !<'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
AGFT?7%"&(7
AGF7($%T?(#9(3%7=P[(7*S
AGF7($%T?(#9(3%7
6ARAT[(7*
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Roles Case:
Properties, Subproperties
and FRBR Entities
Mapping,
Etc.
!"#!$#"% !='()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% !%'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268
!"#!$#"% &"'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268 !"#!$#"% &!'()*+,-./012334/.+5607268

Data-Driven Evidence for
Core MARC Records
William E. Moen
<william.moen@unt.edu>
Director of Research
College of Information
University of North Texas
Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC
NISO Webinar -- October 14, 2009
Moen
Initial comments
• Reporting on a research project conducted in
2005-2007
• No pictures – just numbers and text!
• Title should be:
Data-driven evidence for a core bibliographic
metadata record
• Need to express/represent bib data in current
technologies (e.g., XML, RDF, etc.)
• “MARC must die” – Roy Tennant
• Bibliographic control needs to change
68
Moen
The project and its goals
• Motivation for project
• IMLS-funded Z39.50 Interoperability Testbed Project
(2001-2003)
• Analysis of populated fields in MARC bib records for
indexing decisions
• 4% of all fields/subfields account for 80% of all occurrences
• 96% of all fields/subfields account for 20% of all occurrences
• Examining Present Practices to Inform Future
Metadata Use: An Empirical Analysis of MARC
Content Designation Utilization (MCDU)
• Empirically determine the extent of catalogers’ use of
content designation available in MARC 21 bib format
69
Moen
MCDU project objectives
• Provide empirical evidence of catalogers’ use of MARC
content designation
• Identify commonly used elements in bibliographic
records
• Contribute to community discussion about core elements
in MARC bibliographic records
• Explore the evolution of MARC content designation
• Develop research approach to understand the factors
influencing levels of MARC content designation use
Quality of the data in records was out of scope
70
Moen
Dataset
• 56,177,383 MARC 21 bibliographic records from
OCLC WorldCat (as of May 2005)
• Decomposed the records to store in MySQL
• Partitioned decomposed data into 20 databases
• Type of Record (10 formats) by Source of Cataloging (2,
LC or non-LC)
• Ran frequency counts of fields and subfields
• Total occurrences of fields/subfields
• Total number of records where field/subfield occurred
• 211 fields and 1596 subfields occurred at least once in
the dataset records
• Focus on cataloger-supplied, not system supplied
71
Number % Number % Total
MCDU Project Dataset 56,177,383 100
LC-Created Records Non-LC-Created Records
MCDU Project Datasets by LC/
non-LC 8,713,665 15.5 47,463,718 84.5 56,177,383
Books Records 7,595,887 13.5 34,546,200 61.5 42,142,087
Cartographic Materials 242,132 0.4 596,642 1.1 838,774
Electronic Resources 39,879 0.1 871,881 1.6 911,760
Continuing Resources 388,332 0.7 2,193,009 3.9 2,581,341
Manuscripts 11,471 0.02 4,390,970 7.8 4,402,441
Music 109,249 0.2 1,167,654 2.1 1,276,903
Sound Recordings 241,940 0.4 1,702,342 3.0 1,944,282
Projected Media 22,088 0.04 1,415,606 2.5 1,437,694
Graphic Materials 62,625 0.1 506,401 0.9 569,026
Three-Dimensional Objects and
Realia
62 0.0001 73,013 0.1 73,075

Moen
Field utilization (sample results)
• Utilization in LC-created records where a field is
used at least once:
• Type of Record: Book, Pamphlets, and Printed Sheets
• Total number of records in dataset: 7,595,887
• Number of unique field tags occurring in dataset: 167
• Number of fields tags occurring in every record: 7 (15 fields
occurred in more than 50% of the records)
• Number of fields accounting for 80% of occurrences: 14 fields
(8.3%) [cataloger-supplied, not system-supplied]
• Number of fields accounting for 90% of occurrences: 21 fields
(12.6%) [cataloger-supplied, not system-supplied]
• Approximately 66% (110) used in less than 1% of all records
73
Moen
Field utilization (sample results)
• Utilization in non-LC-created records where a field is
used at least once
• Total Number of Records in Dataset: 34,546,200
• Number of Unique Field Tags Occurring in Dataset: 193
• Number of Fields Tags Occurring in Every Record: 7 (12
fields occur in more than 50% of the records)
• Number of fields accounting for 80% of occurrences: 17
fields (9%) [cataloger-supplied, not system-supplied]
• Number of fields accounting for 90% of occurrences: 28
fields (15%) [cataloger-supplied, not system-supplied]
• Approximately 64% (123) used in less than 1% of all records
74
Moen
Field utilization comparison
Source of
Records
Records in
dataset
Unique Fields
Occurring
Fields Occurring
in Every Record
Fields
accounting for
80% of
occurrences
Fields
accounting for
90% of
occurrences
Fields used in
less than 1% of
records
LC-Created 7,595,887 167 7 14
(8.3%)
21
(12.6%)
110
(66%)
Non-LC
Created
34,546,200 193 * 7 17
(9%)
28
(15%)
123
(64%)
75
!"#$%&'%($)&*+,%!""#$%&'()*+,-.$%'/0%&12/-,0%3*,,-.
* Some of these are OCLC-specific fields such as the 090
Moen
Field/subfield utilization results
• Field/subfield analysis of Non-LC-created
records:
• Total number of records in dataset: 34,546,200
• Number of unique field/subfields used: 1,347
• Number of fields/subfields accounting for 80% of
occurrences: 35 (3%)
• Number of fields/subfields accounting for 90% of
occurrences: 78 (6%)
• Approximately 64% (123) field/subfields used in less than
1% of all records
76
Moen
Evidence for core records?
• Commonly used elements
• Calculated based on frequency counts
• Based on average occurrences (total occurrences/
number of fields or field/subfields)
• Base record fields/subfields across all formats
• LC-created records (8,713,665)
• 7 fields
• 10 field/subfield combinations
• Non-LC-created records (47,463,718)
• 10 fields
77
Moen
Base record – All formats – LC records
Field Subfield Element name
8 -- Fixed Length Data Elements
10 -- LC control no.
10 a LC control no.
245 -- Title Statement
245 a Title
260 -- Pub., Dist., etc.
260 a Place of pub., distribution, etc.
260 c Date of pub., distribution, etc.
300 -- Physical Description
300 a Extent
300 b Other physical details
300 c Dimensions
500 -- General Note
500 a General note
650 -- Subject added entry-topical
650 a Topical term or geographic….
650 z Geographic subdivision
78

Moen
Base record – All formats – Non-LC records
Field Subfield Element name
8 -- Fixed length data elements
43 a Geographic area code
245 -- Title Statement
245 a Title
245 b Remainder of title
245 c Statement of responsibility, etc.
245 h Medium
246 a Title proper/short title
260 -- Pub., Dist., etc.
260 a Place of pub., distribution, etc.
260 c Date of pub., distribution, etc.
300 -- Physical Description
300 a Extent
300 b Other physical details
300 c Dimensions
500 -- General Note
500 a General note
650 -- Subject added entry-topical
650 a Topical term or geographic….
650 v Form subdivision
650 x General subdivision
650 z Geographic subdivision
700 a Personal name
710 a Corporate name or jurisdiction…
79
Moen
Base record – Record Type specific
• Commonly occurring elements in specific Type of Records
• LC-created records (7,595,887)
• Base record:
• 7 fields
• Additional fields/subfields
• 16 fields
• Non-LC-created records (34,546,200)
• Base record:
• 10 fields
• Additional fields/subfields
• 25 fields
80
Moen
Comparison with community guidelines
• Recommendations versus practice
• Compared elements in MCDU to existing guidelines:
• Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) BIBCO Core Records
• CONSER Record Requirements for Full, Minimal and Core Level
Records for Serials
• National and Minimal Level Bibliographic Records Requirements
(Library of Congress)
• See Eklund, et al. article in References
• Key MCDU finding:
• The empirical evidence indicates that catalogers’ utilization of
MARC fields/subfields is not directly aligned with the fields/
subfields prescribed in these guidelines
• MCDU Project data provide an empirical basis for decision-
making about what fields constitute a “core” record – based on
catalogers’ practice
81
Moen
Questions to the community
• What does low occurrence of fields/subfields suggest to
the cataloging community?
• What about the > 60% of all fields/subfields used in < 1% of the
records?
• What is needed in a bibliographic record?
• To support the FRBR-defined user tasks?
• Do we know the extent of, and more specifically which, content
designation structures are needed to support a user task?
• See Miksa, et al. article in References
• To manage information resources?
• Should the focus be on high-value, high-impact, high-
quality data in a few fields/subfields?
• Can we argue persuasively for the cost/benefit of
existing practice?
82
Moen
Final thoughts
• The numbers don’t stand alone
• What does the following mean:
• The 650 field occurs 11,778,732 times in 5,387,282 out of
7,595,887 records
• The 656 field occurs 1 time in 1 out of 7,595,887 records
• The evidence should inform community conversations,
not necessarily dictate decisions
• The MCDU data provide provide empirical
evidence:
• for dialog among standards developers and the
cataloging community
• to improve decision-making about cataloging practices
• to guide what constitutes a core record
83
Moen
Acknowledgements
• Funding provided by
• Institute of Museum and Library Services
• National Leadership Grant LG-02-04-0024-04
• MCDU Research Assistants
• Serhiy Polyakov, Senior Research Assistant
• Amy Eklund, Senior Research Assistant
• Gregory Snyder, Senior Research Assistant
• Iryna Shevchuk, Research Assistant
• Lee Fulton, Research Assistant
• Megan Charters, Research Assistant
• MCDU Principal Investigators
• Dr. William E. Moen, Principal Investigator
• Dr. Shawne Miksa, Co-Principal Investigator
84

Moen
References
• MCDU Project Website
• http://www.mcdu.unt.edu
• Papers and presentations
• http://www.mcdu.unt.edu/?p=40
• Analysis reports & results
• http://www.mcdu.unt.edu/?p=41
• Eklund, A. E. (2006). MCDU Project Report:
Preliminary Analysis of Commonly Occurring
Elements in MARC21 Records from OCLC
WorldCat
• http://www.mcdu.unt.edu/wp-content/
CoreElementsAnalysisae3May2006.pdf
85
Moen
References
• Eklund, et al. (2009).“Comparison of MARC Content Designation
Utilization in OCLC WorldCat Records with National, Core, and Minimal
Level Record Standards.” Journal of Library Metadata, 9:1,36 – 64.
• DOI: 10.1080/19386380903095073
• URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19386380903095073
• Miksa, S., et al. (2006). “Metadata assistance of the functional
requirements for bibliographic records’ four user tasks: A report on the
MARC Content Designation Utilization (MCDU) Project.” In Knowledge
Organization for a Global Learning Society: Proceedings of the 9th
International Conference for Knowledge Organization. International
Society for Knowledge Organization 9th International Conference,
Vienna, Austria. July 5-7, 2006. G. Budin, C. Swertz, & K. Mitgutsch
(Eds.), Advances in Knowledge Organization, vol. 10, pp. 41-49.
Würzburg: Ergon
• http://courses.unt.edu/smiksa/documents/ISKO06sdm23May2006REVISED.pdf
86
Questions?
All questions will be posted with presenter answers on the NISO
website following the webinar:
http://www.niso.org/news/events/2009/bibcontrol09/

Tillett, Hillmann, and Moen, "Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC"

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Tillett, Hillmann, and Moen, "Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC"

Similar to Tillett, Hillmann, and Moen, "Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC" (20)

More from National Information Standards Organization (NISO)

More from National Information Standards Organization (NISO) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Tillett, Hillmann, and Moen, "Bibliographic Control Alphabet Soup: AACR to RDA and Evolution of MARC"