Resource Description and Access

About: Resource Description and Access is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1859 publications have been published within this topic receiving 10957 citations. The topic is also known as: RDA & Resource Description & Access.

Cataloging Oral Histories: Creating MARC Records for Individual Oral History Interviews

Abstract: Cataloging oral histories presents many difficulties, especially for catalogers who have primarily worked with published materials and for institutions without funds or staff dedicated to managing oral history collections. Methods for cataloging oral histories can vary widely among institutions. In this article I examine the issues and considerations involved in providing intellectual access to oral history interviews and offer a possible cataloging method to libraries holding unprocessed oral history materials. The cataloging procedures discussed here have worked well from a workflow standpoint as one of the initial steps to create access to oral histories at Columbus State University, a medium-sized academic library.

Successive Entry, Latest Entry, or None of the Above? How the MARC21 Format, FRBR and the Concept of a Work Could Revitalize Serials Management

Abstract: Current cataloging practices are insufficient to the task of providing access to serial content. The presenters acknowledge that RDA (Resource Description and Access), FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) and the CONSER (Cooperative Online Serials) standard record will improve libraries' ability to respond to the exponential increase in information resources brought about by the Internet but feel that more may be done. Adams and Santamauro propose to apply the concepts of FRBR to serials cataloging and database design, in addition to the user interface, thereby saving time in cataloging and providing the user with cleaner records.

Initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web

Abstract: This paper describes recent initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web, including IFLA standards such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD), and International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) along with the infrastructure that supports them. The FRBR Review Group is currently developing representations of FRAD and the entityrelationship model of FRBR in resource description framework (RDF) applications, using a combination of RDF, RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology Language (OWL), cross-relating both models where appropriate. The ISBD/XML Task Group is investigating the representation of ISBD in RDF. The IFLA Namespaces project is developing an administrative and technical infrastructure to support such initiatives and encourage uptake of standards by other agencies. The paper describes similar initiatives with related external standards such as RDA – resource description and access, REICAT (the new Italian cataloguing rules) and CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CRM). The DCMI RDA Task Group is working with the Joint Steering Committee for RDA to develop Semantic Web representations of RDA structural elements, which are aligned with FRBR and FRAD, and controlled metadata content vocabularies. REICAT is also based on FRBR, and an object-oriented version of FRBR has been

Resource Description and Access (RDA): An Introduction for Reference Librarians

Abstract: A new cataloging code, Resource Description and Access (RDA) was published in June 2010 and has been undergoing tests at select libraries. RDA is a departure from its predecessor, the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, second edition (AACR2), in that it was designed for the online environment, is more principles-based, and better accommodates formats other than print. Liz Miller has been following the development of RDA for a few years and has presented on the topic twice at the New Mexico Library Association Conference. I was delighted when she approached me about writing an article on RDA, one geared to the noncataloger. In this column, reference librarians will learn why RDA was developed, what differences they will see, and how RDA contributes to a new world of library information.--Editor A librarian is cataloging a DVD. She consults a cataloging code, the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, second edition (AACR2), to make decisions about the pieces of information she will include in the catalog record. AACR2 also instructs her on such points as from where on the resource she should take information (for example, should she get the title information for the DVD from the title screen or from the disc label?), when and how to abbreviate words, and how to choose and construct access points. To assign subject terms, she consults a controlled vocabulary, the Library of Congress Subject Headings. She consults yet another standard, the Library of Congress Classification, to assign a class number to collocate the DVD with other resources on the same topic. In all of these processes she uses a standard digital format, Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), to encode the various pieces of information she has selected to include in the record. Correct MARC coding ensures the record will search and display properly in an electronic catalog. The record then becomes part of her library's Integrated Library System (ILS), Millennium. The ILS software determines how the information in the record will be searched, retrieved, and displayed in the Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC), where it will be seen by users of the catalog, including patrons and reference librarians. You may begin to see why some have compared cataloging to solving a puzzle. One piece of the puzzle is about to change. A new cataloging code, Resource Description and Access (RDA), has been developed to take the place of AACR2. The development of RDA is big news for catalogers, of course, but it has implications for reference librarians, too. This article is intended to give reference librarians an introduction to RDA. Readers will learn why RDA was developed, the principles upon which RDA is based, the differences between AACR2 records and RDA records, and why RDA is so important to catalogers yet also controversial. WHY ARE CATALOGING CODES IMPORTANT? In the past, each library would create its own catalog cards. This changed in the early 1900s when the Library of Congress began selling card sets (author, title, and subject) to other libraries. Every card set that a library purchased meant one less that had to be created locally, from scratch. This was an early instance of shared cataloging. (1) When MARC was developed in the 1960s, catalogers started creating records in electronic form. MARC made record sharing much easier because the information in the records could be exchanged between computers. (2) When a cataloger creates an electronic record from scratch and contributes it to a bibliographic utility such as OCLC, a cataloger from any other OCLC member library can download that record instead of creating its own original catalog record. (3) One crucial factor that made it possible for libraries to share records with each other was the wide adoption of AACR2. A uniform cataloging code meant that every cataloger using it was creating records in the same way. It meant that a catalog record created in Poughkeepsie could be used by a library in Tacoma. …

Building an Information Commons at the National Institute of Standards and Technology Library: A Case Study

Abstract: With the advent of the new Knowledge Society, special libraries need to review user zones and services to ensure that they continue to provide features customers want and need. They must now offer spaces and places for people to come together, as in the English Commons of old, to share ideas and technologies. They must heed the call of the open access movement and begin to play a part in it. This article discusses details of the transformation of physical and virtual spaces of the Research Library of the National Institute of Standards and Technology over the past two years into a comprehensive InfoCommons. Introduction The Information Commons is here to stay. New times and user expectations now call for libraries to redraw blueprints and move to innovative service models. We need to adapt, evolve, and reassess to ensure that library spaces—physical and virtual—are useful to users in today’s Knowledge Society. Two years ago, the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Information Services Division and Research Library in Gaithersburg, Maryland began recreating itself to align with a concept of the Information Commons tailored to its customers. Two cross-divisional teams conceived ideas that would optimize the building’s physical space and place digitized NIST documents within the public grasp. A group of reference librarians worked with an advisory board of scientists to add open access journal links to the library’s web site.