1. RDA and OCLC Karen Calhoun Jean Godby Ted Fons Glenn Patton October 2009 Webinar

2. The Current Environment An increasingly diverse universe of bibliographic resources Cataloging practices that do not match users’ expectations Rules that are difficult to maintain Redundant efforts within the publisher – library supply chain

3. RDA: Resource Description and Access “RDA is being developed as a new standard for resource description and access designed for the digital world.” “Built on foundations of AACR2 …” “… developed for use primarily in libraries, but consultations are being undertaken with other communities (archives, museums, publishers, semantic web, etc.) in an effort to attain an effective level of alignment between RDA and the metadata standards used in those communities.” -- RDA Prospectus http://www.rda-jsc.org/rdaprospectus.html

4. Who is Responsible for RDA? Committee of Principals Overall responsibility; representative of library associations and national libraries Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA Responsible for content – the text itself Publishers Responsible for online product preparation and distribution American Library Association Canadian Library Association CILIP (UK library association) Library associations Responsible for training

5. What are the intended benefits of RDA for libraries and the communities they serve? Rules that are designed to be more flexible and more usable across information communities Rules that are a better fit with emerging technologies, especially sharing data with the publishing community Rules that can support an improved discovery experience

6. The public discussion of RDA in the library community RDA will be simpler than AACR2 and cost effective for libraries to implement and use—or not? RDA is compatible with future library metadata approaches incorporating machine-created metadata and advanced machine manipulation of metadata—or not? RDA will make library metadata more interoperable and useful in a digital, Web-based world—or not? RDA will be more responsive to users’ finding, identifying, selecting and obtaining wanted information from library catalogs and similar tools—or not?

7. Polling Question 1 What one intended benefit of RDA is the most important to your library? a.RDA will be simpler than AACR2 and cost effective for libraries to implement and use b.RDA will facilitate future library metadata approaches incorporating machine manipulation of metadata c.RDA will make library metadata more interoperable and useful in a digital, Web-based world d.RDA will be more responsive to users’ finding, identifying, selecting and obtaining wanted information from library catalogs and similar tools e.Some other benefit

8. Beyond the Record Jean Godby

9. The Crosswalk Web Service: Operational Goals Leverage the expertise of metadata standards experts as widely as possible. Maximize the reuse of software. Manage the translation of different versions of metadata standards.

10. OCLC MARC Common Data Format MARC 21- 2709 OCLC MARC OCLC CDF MARC XML DC XML DC-Qualified MODS ONIX Books MARC 21- 2709 DC XML OAI-DC XML OCLC CDF MARC XML MODS ONIX Books The translations DC-Qualified ONIX Serials OutputsInputs RDA

11. What’s missing: a data encoding standard Most applications of the Crosswalk Web Service have involved AACR2-encoded data. The adoption of RDA will: Simplify the mappings. Let more relationships be expressed.

12. Mapping physical formats from ONIX to MARC ONIX record ONIX ProductForm AA Audio AB Audio Cassette … BA Book BB Hardback BC Paperback … DA Digital DB CD-ROM.. ZZ Other Merchandise ONIX to MARC map Input MARC record Leader Type of record … 007 Category of material Specific material designation … 008 Type of computer file … 300 $a Output

13. Mapping formats with RDA ONIX to MARC mapping Format type Media type Carrier ONIX record MARC record Input Output MARC record ONIX to MARC map

14. MARC 21- 2709 OCLC MARC OCLC CDF MARC XML DC XML DC-Qualified MODS ONIX Books MARC 21- 2709 DC XML OAI-DC XML OCLC CDF MARC XML MODS ONIX Books The translations DC-Qualified ONIX Serials OutputsInputs RDA

15. Future priorities Work with standards committees to identify roadblocks in the implementation of RDA. Make all OCLC-developed mappings publicly available.

16. Some important links OCLC Metadata Schema Transformation Services -- www.oclc.org/research/activities/schematrans/ www.oclc.org/research/activities/schematrans/ OCLC Metadata Services for Publishers -- http://publishers.oclc.org http://publishers.oclc.org

17. Questions?

18. Beyond the Record, Part 2 Ted Fons With thanks to Diane Vizine-Goetz, OCLC Office of Research

20. FRBR Entity Levels Revisited Item Manifestation Expression Work The novelOriginal TextTranslation Critical Edition Paper Copy 1 Autographed Copy 2PDFHTML The movie Original Version Based on a graphic in Tillett, Barbara "AACR2's Strategic Plan and IFLA Work towards an International Cataloguing Code“ (2002)

21. Share data elements across a FRBR Work Set Manifestation Expression Work The novel Original Text SummaryTranslation Critical Edition Cover Art Subject Terms

22. Work pages beta Provides a rich context from cataloging data

26. Polling question 2 What, if any, steps are you or your library taking toward implementing RDA? a.Changing our cataloging practices b.Attending RDA sessions and reading RDA materials c.Participating in standards work d.Waiting to see how others proceed e.Some combination of the above f.No plans for implementation

27. OCLC’s Involvement with RDA Development Glenn Patton

28. OCLC and RDA Involvement through ALA ex-officio membership in the ALA Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access MARC Advisory Committee Joint Steering Committee's two RDA Examples Groups RDA/MARC Working Group ALA ALCTS RDA Implementation Task Force Presentations at various program sessions

29. OCLC and RDA Involvement through IFLA Membership in the FRBR Review Group Leadership for the FRBR Review Group’s Working Group on Aggregates Leadership for the Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records Membership in the Working Group on Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records Membership in the ISBD Review Group

30. U.S. National Libraries Testing Coordinated by LC, NAL and NLM Various types of organizations Academic libraries, public libraries, school libraries, special libraries, cataloging agencies Variety of cataloging systems, OPACs, types of material, formats and rules 6-month testing period beginning after the release of RDA Online Initially working with MARC 21 records

31. Testing Methodology Core set of 25 resources which each of the participants will catalog using AACR2 and RDA Other resources from the institutions’ usual materials Online survey forms to gather qualitative and quantitative feedback Review and analysis of the records

32. MARC 21 Changes Bibliographic records 040 ‡e code ‘rda’ to identify the rules used New fields for content type, media type and carrier type Field 336 – Content type Field 337 – Media type Field 338 – Carrier type Authority records 040 ‡e code ‘rda’ to identify the rules used Other fields for entity attributes OCLC implementation in time for use in the testing

33. Additional Resources The JSC web site http://www.rda-jsc.org/ The RDA Online web site http://www.rdaonline.org/ MARC 21 changes http://www.loc.gov/marc/formatchanges-RDA.html LC/NAL/NLM testing http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/

34. Additional Resources 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

35. Additional Resources OCLC Training Portal http://training.oclc.org

36. Questions?