1. Prepared by Elena Escolano
Alignment of the ISBD element set with the IFLA LRM element set and its impact on ISBD revision (some ideas)
Prepared by Elena Escolano
Task group for the Analysis of the Alignment and Impact of IFLA LRM to ISBD (chair)
for
Impact of the IFLA Library Reference Model on ISBD, RDA and other Bibliographic Standards Working Meeting
Friday 25 August 2017, Wroclaw

2. Metholodological decisions Issues debated:
Task Group for the Analysis of the Alignment and Impact of IFLA LRM on ISBD, formed on Dec. 2016:
Renate Behrens-Neumann (representing RDA);
Elena Escolano Rodríguez (chair);
Massimo Gentili-Tedeschi;
Dorothy McGarry;
Clement Oury (representing ISSN);
Pat Riva (representing the Consolidation Editorial Group of the FRBR Review Group);
Melanie Roche.
Metholodological decisions
Issues debated:
Manifestation statement
meaning of “transcription”
Concept of Manifestation
Challenging alignments
Impact on ISBD revision

3. Metholodological decisions
To use:
ISBD-FRBR alignment table as starting point
Transitional mappings FRBR – Library Reference Model
Last version of IFLA LRM
ISBD Namespace / LRM still not declared
To preserve the nature of ISBD:
Bibliographic control assured.
Keeping granularity

4. Derived from decision on use of ISBD namespace
The table includes other elements that were not in the ISBD-FRBR alignment:
ISBD Resource class - aligned as sub-class of RES, so continue being the Domain of ISBD elements. Resource needs to be disjoined with WEMI entities so that it can be related with any of them.
Areas and component statements - aligned as more specific (<) than the LRM manifestation statement.
ISBD syntax encoding schemes (SES): ISBD as rules to which these schemes belong is a work. Decided for this alignment to include SES as subtype class of RES, subtyped by areas

5. Issues debated: LRM same approach as in FRBR:
“The model developed in the study is comprehensive in scope but not exhaustive in terms of the entities, attributes, and relationships that it defines.”
“Any practical application will need to determine an appropriate level of precision …”
ISBD decision: starting from ISBD granularity, follow LRM mechanisms that permit the expansions: as the manifestation statement

6. Issues debated:Concept of Manifestation statement in both standards
No problem with LRM definition, but Scope note controversial
In Manifestation entity Scope note: use recorded

7. Transcription definition
Latin origin. Evolution of meaning: record/copy to currently change into another form
LRM transcription = ISBD description; recording ISBD transcribe definition App. E = exact copy ISBD A.5: “Areas 1,2,3,4 and 6 are normally transcribed or recorded … 5,7 and 8 are usually not transcribed”

8. Issues debated:Concept of Manifestation statement in both standards
ISBD manifestation statement, can be:
Transcribed as in titles and statement of responsibility areas 1 and 6 (see ISBD A.5-A.6)
Partially transcribed or recorded, but found in the resource (rest of the areas where abbreviations, omissions, additions are allowed. Eg. Area 2 is a transcription area but prescribes Arabic numerals in place of other numerals, also allows abbreviations, such as "ed.“ etc.)
mix of transcription and description as information on identifiers in area 8 and notes on relationships area 7
eg. ISBN:
Transcription ISBN (invalid)
Description ISBN (corrected)
Descriptive of the resource (eg. area 5) or
Descriptive of the information in the resource, as they are recorded in notes, area 7. (eg. Content, summary notes)
Even descriptive statements of information found outside the resource - in such cases that ISBD prescribe the use of square brackets.
(eg. Notes on bibliographic history or Other physical formats, reproductions, …etc.)

9. Issues debated:Concept of Manifestation statement in both standards
LRM:
ISBD decision was made: to consider the scope note terms “normally transcribed” in a general sense to include all these ways of recording descriptive information in ISBD.
Possible impact on ISBD: to revise the use of the term transcription; to change definition including difference with LRM.

10. Issues debated:Concept of Manifestation different in both standards
ISBD concept: limited to published resources.
LRM concept includes non published resources. More problematic: “However, when multiple items from different manifestations are physically combined or joined (books or pamphlets bound together, audio tapes spliced together, etc.) the result is a new singleton manifestation.” = includes factitious volumes or collections of published resources.
Decision: until ISBD is not extended to include non-published resources, singleton manifestations are outside the scope of ISBD and from this alignment.

11. LRM Concept of Manifestation impact in ISBD
Study on ISBD including Non-published resources was carried in , decided it was feasable. The study was done with the concept of Non-published as manuscript, never including published resources.
LRM is more abstract than FRBR, but with this definition goes too much in depth.
If desired to maintain the initial priniples of assuring bibliographic control and keeping granularity ISBD revision would have options:
To make repeatable all the areas
To develop the rules on multilevel description and Guidelines … description of component parts, level of description that should not be optional in this case.
To select the FRBR concept of Manifestation: “Changes that occur to an individual copy after the production process is complete (e.g., the loss of a page, rebinding, etc.) are not considered to result in a new manifestation.”

12. LRM Concept of Manifestation impact in ISBD
On the contrary:
ISBD would not meet the ICP principles 6 Objectives and Functions of the Catalogue:
Find all resources…, Identify all resources…, obtain access …
ISBD would not achieve UBC –the information resulting of the application of the standard would not help for exchange or other uses. It is not possible to access, to link, to collect, to share, to navigate… nonexistent information.
Even it would not accomplish with local bibliographic control that helps to avoid duplications = ISBD principle cost-effective practice

13. Challenging alignments
ISBD element could align with many attributes in LRM. Decision: possible multiple alignments e.g.
Some alignments to relationships necessary (area 6, 7 and 8)
Decision: differentiate the multiple alignments in different lines - Manifestation statement as the first alignment according with ISBD
eg. Area 8
Impact: revise ISBD to be relational? Up to what point?

14. Conclusion
In ISBD-LRM alignment inexistence of “non-aplicable” alignments as there were in ISBD-FRBR alignment.
Open path for ISBD to consider becoming relational
ISBD will need to reconsider be extended to non-published resources or to discuss to what extent to include it?