RDA 3R Project and the New Toolkit

Pada akhir 2017, tim pengembang dan tim editor RDA memulai sebuah proyek perombakan konsep RDA dan RDA Toolkit yang bertujuan:

• Mendesain ulang fungsi RDA Tookit agar sejalan dengan perubahan lingkungan digital
• Membuat proses manajamen data di balik layar lebih efisien
• Meningkatkan fungsi  perangkat editing dan penerjemahan
• Merevisi penggunaan teks RDA dengan mengacu pada Library Reference Model (LRM) yang diperkenalkan IFLA untuk untuk menggantikan model konseptual FRBR, FRAD, dan FRSAD.

Hasil perubahan desain RDA Tookit mulai dirilis pada tahun 2018 dan pemutakhiran terus dilakukan secara bertahap. Pada Bulan April 2019, versi stabil dari RDA berbahasa Inggris telah dirilis dalam format beta. Versi stabil ini kemudian dijadikan dasar untuk pembuatan pernyataan kebijakan (policy statement) dan penerjemahannya. RDA Toolkit versi ini direncanakan akan dirilis pada tahun awal 2020 setelah RDA Toolkit yang sekarang digunakan berakhir pada akhir tahun 2019. RDA Toolkit terbaru versi beta dapat diakses pada: https://beta.rdatoolkit.org

***

In late 2017, the editors and developers of RDA embarked on a major project to overhaul RDA and the RDA Toolkit.  The project aimed to:

• Functionally redesign the online Toolkit, to adjust to changes in the online environment
• Streamline background data management processes
• Improve editing and translation tools
• Update the text of RDA to comply with IFLA-LRM (the conceptual model that has replaced FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD)

A "Beta version" of the RDA Toolkit was released in 2018 and has gradually been updated and added to since then. On April 30, 2019, a final stabilised version of the English text of RDA was released into the BETA version.  This stabilised text will now be used as the basis for writing translations and policy statements.  The final release of the new RDA is expected early in 2020, after which the current RDA will remain live for a year. New RDA Toolkit Beta can be accessed at: https://beta.rdatoolkit.org

See the difference:

New RDA Toolkit (Beta) - Final version to be released on 2020

RDA Toolkit - until the end of 2019

What is the 3R Project?

The RDA Toolkit Restructure and Redesign (3R) Project adds greater flexibility and utility to RDA Toolkit's display of instructions and RDA-related documents and updates the look and feel of the site. The restructure portion of the project involved a major rebuild of the instruction repository in order to bring it in line with current data management best practices, make RDA data more modular and dynamic, and allow the RSC to track and manage a greater range of metadata associated with the instructions. The redesign portion of the project included adoption of a responsive design and a plan to bring the site in compliance with established accessibility standards. There are also improvements to toolkit navigation, display, and features to create a user experience that is more intrinsically of the web. At the same time, RDA is being edited to bring it in compliance with the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM).

Get more information about 3R Project at: http://rda-rsc.org/node/551#10 

Revision

The RDA standard and the RDA Toolkit are currently undergoing a major revision, with implementation at the Library expected to take place during 2020. The revision comprises a complete redesign of the online Toolkit, a restructure of the standard to align with the IFLA Library Reference Model, which replaced FRBR, FRAD and FRSAD in 2017, and a consequent rewriting of the instructions.  A beta version of the Toolkit is already available, and the final version of the English text will be released in late April this year.

While not as large scale as the original implementation of RDA in 2013, support and training will still be required in order for staff to correctly interpret RDA and effectively utilise the new Toolkit in their work.   It will also involve revision of policies on RDA, and may involve changes to cataloguing workflows and documentation.

Cataloguing tips - Recording authors in corporate body publication

Is it necessary to record a group of writers stated in a introductory page of a work published by government body?

That would depend on the prominence of the authors and how they are represented, and also on the content of the resource. If it says on the title page that the authors wrote the book, then we probably assert them as the creators, with the corporate body as 710. If they are just listed in the introduction , they may not need to be included. Remember that the corporate body is only asserted as creator, if they fit the RDA criteria for status as creator, so you may have situations when no one is listed as a main creator, but all are listed in 7XX fields.

Cataloguing tips - Biographical work

Generally, biographical work is about story of a figure from birth to old age or death. If a work tells only a part of life. for example school period, can we consider this work as biography?

Yes.

What about if a work contains testimonies from several people about a figure?

Not necessarily a 'biographical work' but could be considered to contain 'biographical content' and there is a code for this in the 008.

Cataloging tips - False use of copyright date

In the case of a publisher/author using false copyright date, how can cataloger be sure about the validity of copyright date?

Of course this always a possibility, But, at the cataloging stage, it is not our responsibility to verify copyright, only to record information we have. RDA does not rule on what to do if we know it is false (probably because in many western countries like the US, copyright is not automatic and must be applied for). So, it is better to record it as copyright information (representing the resource as it represents itself) but then use a note to explain that it's known to be fake. It frequently happens that the copyright status is valid but the date is false. Commercial publishers will often do this when they publish something towards the end of the year. They will often put the following year as the copyright date, to give the content more "currency". Again, if we know the date to be false, we still record it as the copyright date, but then use a note to record actual date.

Cataloging tips - Confusing copyright symbol

If publisher use the @ symbol followed by year, for example @2018 in the copyright area, can we assume that the @ symbol is meant to be © symbol?

Yes, if it is clearly associated with a copyright date.

Cataloguing tips - Confusing copyright date

A book copyright-ed in 2010, then reprinted and copyrighted in 2018. Which date is used to determine the correct copyright of the book? Should both dates recorded on tag 542?

Simply to record the information the resource gives us. Generally would record the latest date in the 264, and then you can record both dates in the 542. Note that though 542 is a highly formatted note and you need to ensure you you use the right field. $g (for copyright date) is not repeatable. $f could be used if there's a statement on the resource that includes both dates. You could use $n (note) otherwise.

Save the date: RDA all-day conference on August 23, 2018, hosted by the National Library of Malaysia in Kuala Lumpur

This event is organized by the RDA Board. It will be held at the National Library of Malaysia, 232 Jalan Tun Razak, Kuala Lumpur.

Join us for a full-day event focused on RDA, and looking particularly at the ways in which RDA is evolving to accommodate the needs of cataloguing communities around the world.

There will be RDA experts presenting on topics such as the restructure and redesign of the RDA Toolkit, how RDA governance has changed to ensure dialogue with all regions and language communities of the globe, case studies of RDA implementation in different geographical regions, optimizing cataloguing data for the linked data environment.

There will be formal presentations and opportunities to talk with those who have already implemented RDA. It is a good opportunity to hear about the latest developments as well as consult with colleagues about RDA implementation.

Who should attend?

Anyone from libraries that have not yet adopted RDA as their cataloguing standard -- you will hear case studies from those who have - what worked and what didn't?

Existing, new and prospective users of the RDA Toolkit will receive a live demonstration of the new Toolkit after the 3R Project

Library decision-makers who want to know how RDA is evolving to accommodate international users, from practical issues of facilitating translation to complex issues of different descriptive practices

National libraries who want to be involved at the national, regional and international level in the governance of RDA

Library professionals interested in innovative ways of reusing cataloguing data in a linked data environment

Library skills trainers interested in delivering RDA training

Look out for more information on the RDA Conference website, coming soon. For any enquiries, please contact one of these RDA Board members:

Chris Oliver, University of Ottawa

Representative for the Canadian Federation of Library Associations

christine.oliver@uottawa.ca

Amelia McKenzie, National Library of Australia

National Institution Representative for Oceania

amckenzie@nla.gov.au

Ben Gu, National Library of China

National Institution Representative for Asia

bgu@nlc.cn

We look forward to seeing you in Kuala Lumpur!

http://www.rda-rsc.org/node/557

Cataloguing tips - Rare books

I am cataloguing a resource written in Latin, do I transcribe the title with old lettering and make a added entry with the modern letters?

In your transcription convert the old Latin letters into modern letters (see the LC-PCC-PS 1.4) Latin contains some letters that look different to our modern letters, for example a Latin S looks more like an F, or a Latin U looks like a V.  When transcribing, keep in mind the intent of the letter; an S is still an S even if it looks more like a modern F.   We are still adhering to transcribing the title on the item, its just certain letters look different on modern keyboards.  With this in mind there is no need to make an added entry.

Cataloguing tips - RDA Core Element vs Non-Core Element

Jika RDA menyebutkan sebuah elemen adalah ‘core element’, apakah berarti cataloguer harus mencantumkannya dalam kondisi apapun? Bahkan jika elemen tersebut tidak ditemukan atau tidak dapat diterapkan pada bahan yang sedang dikatalog, misalnya tahun hak cipta?

Tidak. Sebuah elemen hanya dianggap sebagai ‘core element’ hanya jika ditemukan pada bahan yang sedang dikatalog. Jika bahan tersebut tidak memiliki informasi mengenai tahun hak cipta, maka elemen ini tidak dapat diterapkan dan tidak perlu dicantumkan. Yang dimaksud ‘core’ disini adalah mencantumkan informasi yang ditemukan dan dapat diterapkan pada bahan yang sedang dikatalog.

Sebaliknya, jika RDA atau kebijakan pengatalogan menyebutkan sebuah elemen termasuk ‘noncore element’, apakah berarti cataloguer tidak perlu mencantumkan informasi tersebut?

Jawabannya adalah tidak. Jika cataloguer merasa bahwa informasi tersebut bermanfaat bagi pengguna maka sebaiknya informasi tersebut dicantumkan meskipun ia bukan ‘core element’. ‘noncore element’ secara sederhana dapat diartikan cataloguer tidak perlu mencantumkan sebuah informasi tetapi jika dirasa informasi tersebut bermanfaat bagi pengguna maka cataloguer boleh mencantumkannya.


If RDA, or cataloguing policy says an element is a "core" element, does that mean I have to record it in ALL circumstances, even if it is not on the item, or not applicable (eg copyright date)?

No, core elements are only core if they are applicable to the material you are cataloguing. So if your resource does not have a copyright date, then this element is not applicable to your material so should not be recorded. So. Core means "Record the information if it is readily ascertainable and applicable to the resource being catalogued"

If RDA, or cataloguing policy says that an element is not core, does this mean I shouldn't record that element?

Again, the answer is no. If you think the information will be useful to the user, then record the information. "Non-core" simply means you are not required to record that information, but you may record, and if you think it is going to be useful, you probably should record it.

Cataloguing Tips - Describing Braille and Other Tactile Resources

Mendeskripsikan Braile dan Media Tactile

Braille adalah sistem penulisan dan pencetakan yang didesain untuk penyandang tuna aksara. Braile terdiri dari titik-titik timbul yang merepresentasikan huruf dan angka. Bentuk tactile lainnya digunakan untuk notasi music, peta, dan gambar. Pada dasarnya Braile dan media tactile bukan termasuk bahasa melainkan bentuk notasi yang mendeskripsikan konten dari suatu hasil karya. Dalam RDA, braille dan media tactile merupakaan atribut dari expression. Instruksi untuk pendeskripsian braille dan media tactile terdapat pada bab 6 (attributes of works and expressions) dan bab 7 (describing content). Cara pendeskripsian braille dan media tactile di RDA adalah sebagai berikut:

1. Isi field 007 dengan Tactile Material
2. Isi field 008 (Form of item), kemudian pilih ‘f’ untuk braille
3. Isi field 336 dengan content type yang sesuai (RDA 6.9), misalnya tactile text, cartographic tactile image
4. Isi filed 300 dengan deskripsi fisik, misalnya $a 75 pages ; $c 23 cm, $b umumnya tidak digunakan 
5. Isi field 546. Gunakan subfield $a untuk menginformasikan Bahasa yang digunakan untuk Braille (RDA 7.12). Gunakan subfield $b untuk menginformasikan bentuk notasi yang digunakan (RDA 7.13). Jika sumber informasi terdiri dari teks dan Braille, maka subfield ini bersifat repeatable. Untuk jenis sumber informasi Braille non-teks, dapat menggunakan $b secara berulang. Kemungkinan $a tidak digunakan kecuali jika sumber informasi tersebut mengandung teks. 

Contoh,

546 $aEnglish $bBraille [resource is in Braille only]
546 $aEnglish $bRoman alphabet $bBraille [resource in both printed text and Braille]
546 $bstaff notation $bBraille [music resource in Braille]

Field 500 dapat digunakan untuk menginformasikan lebih jauh mengenai konten tersebut.

Pembuatan access point (authorised) tidak diperlukan untuk Braille kecuali untuk membedakan antara expression yang berbeda dari work yang sama, atau jika judul dari expression berbeda dari judul aslinya.

Describing Braille and Other Tactile Resources

Braille is a system of writing and printing for blind or visually impaired people, in which arrangements of raised dots are used to represent letters of the alphabet and numerals. Other, similar tactile forms can be used to express music notation, maps and images.

Therefore, rather than being a language, Braille and other tactile systems are a form of tactile notation in which the content of a work can be expressed*. * Being an attribute of the expression, instructions in RDA for recording tactile notation are found in Chapter 6 (attributes of works and expressions) and Chapter 7 (Describing content). Therefore, to correctly describe a Braille or other tactile resource using RDA in a MARC record, you need to do the following:

1. Input a 007 field for Tactile Material, and appropriately assign the codes in each section.
2. In the 008 field, under Form of item (position 23), choose "f" for braille.
3. In the 336 field, record the appropriate RDA content type (see RDA 6.9) and associated MARC code, eg. tactile text, cartographic tactile image
4. In the 300 field, record the extent and type in the $a, and the size in the $c. $b would usually not be included. Eg. 300 $a75 pages ;$c23 cm.
5. In the 546 field. Use the $a to indicate which language has been used as the basis for the Braille notation, if known (see RDA 7.12). Use the $b to indicate the form of notation that has been used (see RDA 7.13). If the resource contains both printed text and Braille, this subfield is repeatable. For non-text resources in Braille, you would use one or more $b subfields and probably no $a subfield (unless the resource included text)

Eg:

546 $aEnglish $bBraille [resource is in Braille only]
546 $aEnglish $bRoman alphabet $bBraille [resource in both printed text and Braille]
546 $bstaff notation $bBraille [music resource in Braille]

A 500 note may be used if required to further explain the presentation of the content.

There is no requirement for an authorised access point for the Braille expression (uniform title in the old terminology) unless it is required to distinguish the expression from other expressions of the same work, or if the title of the expression differs from the original work. In either case, Braille cant be used in the access point as a distinguishing element, as there is no appropriate MARC subfield for it.

Cataloguing tips - unclear function of corporate body

Nama badan pemerintah tercantum pada halaman judul tetapi tidak ada informasi mengenai peran dari nama tersebut. Apakah dapat dianggap sebagai pihak yang menerbitkan?

Jika tidak ditemukan informasi yang jelas mengenai peran dari nama badan pemerintah tersebut maka cukup berikan access point tanpa relationship designator.

A government body name appears on the publisher area of the title page but no information about its role. Should this body still considered as the issuing body?

If it’s unclear whether they are the issueing body, then probably no.  Just given them an access point with no relationship designator

Cataloguing tips - Unclear function of corporate body

Pada halaman judul tercantum tiga atau lebih nama badan korporasi namun tidak ada informasi mengenai peran mereka pada karya tersebut. Apakah access point tetap perlu diberikan kepada salah satu badan korporasi?

Semua badan korporasi tersebut perlu diberikan access point tetapi tanpa relationship designator. Jika ternyata terlalu banyak badan korporasi yang dicantumkan maka cataloguer dapat membuat penilaian sendiri. Jika dirasa tidak praktis untuk memberikan access point kepada semua badan korporasi, cataloguer dapat menggunakan opsi dalam RDA untuk hanya memberikan access point ke badan korporasi pertama saja. Pada kasus ini, cataloguer juga dapat menuliskan semua nama badan korporasi pada area pernyataan tanggung jawab atau catatan, agar tetap bisa mendapat access.

Three or more corporate on the title page and no information about their role. Should an access point should be given to one of them?  

They should all get access points, because they are prominently named, but don’t use a relationship designator.  You may wish to use some judgement here if there a lots of them.  If it’s not practical to list them all, then follow the option in RDA to only give access to the first of them.  You might, in this case, consider listing the names in the Statement of Responsibility or a note, so at least there is keyword access.

Cataloguing tips - Compilation vs collaboration

Lima penulis membuat sebuah buku. Penulis A menulis bab 1, penulis B menulis bab 2, dan seterusnya. Apakah ini termasuk karya kompilasi atau karya kolaborasi?

Ini termasuk kompilasi karena setiap bab pada dasarnya bersifat independen yang kemudian dikompilasi bersama-sama. Karya kolaborasi adalah ketika ada sebuah karya yang ditulis oleh banyak penulis secara bersamaan.

Five authors create a single theme book. Author A creates chapter 1, author B for chapter 2, and so on. Is this compilation or collaboration work?

This is a compilation, because the chapters are essentially independently created works that have been compiled together.  A collaboration is when there is only one creative work that has been written by multiple authors.