RDA Testing & Comparison with AACR2（session 1）

RDA Testing Comparison with AACR2 ( sess/on 1 Charlene Chou Columbia University at the Lingnan University Dec.6,2010

1 RDA Testing & Comparison with AACR2 (session 1) Charlene Chou Columbia University at the Lingnan University Dec. 6, 2010

Agenda ■ Background ■Goa|s a RDa testing in US(Oct -DeC 2010 Tester Group at Columbia ( July 1, 2010-) a What s new in RDA: comparison with AACR2 a MARC21: new and updated tags a Summary: initial observations

2 Agenda ◼ Background ◼ Goals ◼ RDA testing in US (Oct.-Dec. 2010) ◼ Tester Group at Columbia (July 1, 2010-) ◼ What’s new in RDA: comparison with AACR2 ◼ MARC21: new and updated tags ◼ Summary: initial observations

Background In response to concerns about RDa raised by the library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, the three U.s. national libraries--the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine and the National Agricultural Library--made a commitment to the further development and completion of RDA. The three libraries agreed to make a joint decision on whether or not to implement rda, based on the results of a test of both rda and the Web product. The goal of the test is to assure the operational, technical, and economic feasibility of rDa Testers will include the three national libraries and the broader U.s. library community Columbia University is one of selected testing institutions More information on LC WG website at http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rdal

3 Background ◼ In response to concerns about RDA raised by the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, the three U.S. national libraries—the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine and the National Agricultural Library—made a commitment to the further development and completion of RDA. The three libraries agreed to make a joint decision on whether or not to implement RDA, based on the results of a test of both RDA and the Web product. The goal of the test is to assure the operational, technical, and economic feasibility of RDA. Testers will include the three national libraries and the broader U.S. library community. ◼ Columbia University is one of selected testing institutions. ◼ More information on LC WG website at: http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/

Goals a RDA Resource Description Access) a The new, unified standard for resource description and access, designed for the digital world and an expanding universe of metadata users ■ Approach:pros&cons a Emphasis a Practical experiences and observations during testing orocess a Comparison between RDa and AACR2 口 CuK examples a This is not a training session but an informative session for the discussion of issues

4 Goals ◼ RDA (Resource Description & Access)  The new, unified standard for resource description and access, designed for the digital world and an expanding universe of metadata users. ◼ Approach: pros & cons ◼ Emphasis:  Practical experiences and observations during testing process  Comparison between RDA and AACR2  CJK examples ◼ This is not a training session but an informative session for the discussion of issues!

RDA Testing RDA Test " rain the trainer on 1/15/10 a RDA Basecamp(Testers' website)with all related documents a Training manual and documents a Comparison between aacr2& RDa a RDA core elements(core core if.) a Choices in rda LC proposed practice for the rDa test 163 options and alternatives in RDA (alternative/optional omission/optional addition) 口 Exercises

5 RDA Testing ◼ RDA Test “Train the Trainer” on 1/15/10 ◼ RDA Basecamp (Testers’ website) with all related documents ◼ Training manual and documents: Comparison between AACR2 & RDA ◼ RDA core elements (core & core if…) Choices in RDA ◼ LC proposed practice for the RDA test ◼ 163 options and alternatives in RDA (alternative/optional omission/optional addition) Exercises

RDA Testing a Official testing time is from Oct. 1-DeC 31 2010 a RDa testing cataloging decisions 口 Common set titles 25 titles(10 textual monographS; 5 audio-visual; 5 serials-print or other; 5 integrating resources a All titles will be in English; items with paralle languages may be included a Each institution catalogs one common set by two different persons-one using RDA; another one using the current codes Only descriptive elements; no subject analysis is to be done a No searching of local or national database

6 RDA Testing ◼ Official testing time is from Oct.1-Dec.31, 2010 ◼ RDA testing cataloging decisions Common set titles ◼ 25 titles (10 textual monographs; 5 audio-visual; 5 serials-print or other; 5 integrating resources) ◼ All titles will be in English; items with parallel languages may be included ◼ Each institution catalogs one common set by two different persons—one using RDA; another one using the current codes ◼ Only descriptive elements; no subject analysis is to be done ◼ No searching of local or national database

RDA Testing-EXtra set RDA testing cataloging decisions D EXtra set for regular materials 25 titles using RDA u Catalog these materials using normal procedures, e.g. perform authority work if normally does so Catalog these materials to accommodate MARC21 changes related to rda If a testing institution is a PCC member, provide PCc coding 口 Decisions a LC will host the site containing all the test rda records, and work with OCLC to resolve the technical issues for record transferring u Submit records for common set and regular titles to LC for analysis by the Testing Coordinating Committee a Each institution must submit a survey response for each record Via email, b tillett has agreed to include cjk titles for RDa training examples

7 RDA Testing—Extra set ◼ RDA testing cataloging decisions  Extra set for regular materials: ◼ 25 titles using RDA ◼ Catalog these materials using normal procedures, e.g. perform authority work if normally does so ◼ Catalog these materials to accommodate MARC21 changes related to RDA ◼ If a testing institution is a PCC member, provide PCC coding  Decisions: ◼ LC will host the site containing all the test RDA records, and work with OCLC to resolve the technical issues for record transferring. ◼ Submit records for common set and regular titles to LC for analysis by the Testing Coordinating Committee ◼ Each institution must submit a survey response for each record ◼ Via email, B. Tillett has agreed to include CJK titles for RDA training examples

Tester Group at Columbia Chaired by the director of Original Cataloging Division a Testers include Original Catalogers from Central Technical Services, one representative from East Asian Library and one representative from Law Library a In addition to marc record creation our Metadata Coordinator also creates non-MARC metadata records( MOds)

8 Tester Group at Columbia ◼ Chaired by the Director of Original Cataloging Division ◼ Testers include Original Catalogers from Central Technical Services, one representative from East Asian Library and one representative from Law Library. ◼ In addition to MARC record creation, our Metadata Coordinator also creates non-MARC metadata records (MODS)

Tester Group training period u Almost weekly meeting from july 1 to Sept 30.2010 a Listened to rda webinars Reviewed the powerpoint slides ■ Reviewed rda toolkit 口 Navigation D Created workflows for rare books metadata, etc Organized and reviewed related training documents for both bibliographic and authority records

9 Tester Group: training period ◼ Almost weekly meeting from July 1 to Sept. 30, 2010 ◼ Listened to RDA webinars ◼ Reviewed the Powerpoint slides ◼ Reviewed RDA Toolkit Navigation Created workflows for rare books, metadata, etc. ◼ Organized and reviewed related training documents for both bibliographic and authority records

Selected rDa resources RDA toolkit RDA Toolkit-a guided tour by Troy Linker 2/889/2010 Basecamp C test site LC documentation: including examples compared to AACR2 and LC Policy statements University of Chicago documentation and examples Adam Schiffs Comparison RDA Testing and pcc document 10

10 Selected RDA resources ◼ RDA toolkit ◼ RDA Toolkit—a guided tour by Troy Linker (2/8&9/2010) ◼ Basecamp ◼ LC test site ◼ LC documentation: including examples compared to AACR2 and LC Policy Statements ◼ University of Chicago documentation and examples ◼ Adam Schiff’s Comparison ◼ RDA Testing and PCC document