1. Moving Beyond MARC: Musings Rick Block

2. Rick Block On RDA: “I think it is a disaster. I'm hoping it is never implemented.” Library Journal Nov. 15, 2008

3. Rick Block On MARC: Unlike some of his colleagues, he believes the MARC record has a future. He points out the example that Columbia has invested a great deal in it, even in its electronic displays. “We have millions of records in MARC,” says Block, “so I don't think it will go away.” Library Journal Nov. 15, 2008

4. Rick Block on ?: “When I was in library school in the early ’80s, the students weren’t as interesting” New York Times July 8, 2007 A Hipper Crowd of Shushers

5. Rhode Island: its neither a road nor an island … discuss

17. MARC “The electronic embalming of the catalog card.” --Michael Gorman “MARC has always been an arcane standard. No other profession uses MARC or anything like it.” --Roy Tennant

18. MARC “There are only two kinds of people who believe themselves able to read a MARC record without referring to a stack of manuals: a handful of our top catalogers and those on serious drugs.” Roy Tennant. MARC Must Die

20. OCLC: NEW Rec stat: n Entered: 20030207 Replaced: 20030207 Used: 20030207 Type: r ELvl: I Srce: d Audn: Ctrl: Lang: dog BLvl: m Form: GPub : Time: nnn MRec: Ctry: mou Desc: a TMat: r Tech: n DtSt: m Dates: 1999,9999 040 $a ZCU $c ZCU 020 $a 101010101 : $c priceless 090 $a SF429.S64 $b R62 1999 092 $a 636.76 $2 21 049 $a ZPSA 245 00 $a Rocky $h [realia] : $b beloved pet / $c raised and loved by Rick Block and Bill Vosburg. 260 $a Missouri : $b Farm, $c 1999- 300 $a 1 dog : $b male, black and white, 18 lbs. ; $c 51 x 33 cm. 490 1 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1 650 0 $a Shih tzu. 830 0 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1.

21. MARC: WoGroFuBiCo 3.1.1.1 LC: Recognizing that Z39.2/MARC are no longer fit for the purpose, work with the library and other interested communities to specify and implement a carrier for bibliographic information that is capable of representing the full range of data of interest to libraries, and of facilitating the exchange of such data both within the library community and with related communities.”

22. MARC:RLG/OCLC Implications of MARC Tag Usage on Library Metadata Practices "5. MARC itself is arguably too ambiguous and insufficiently structured to facilitate machine processing and manipulation." p.27

24. Standards Landscape for Descriptive Data “The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from.” Data Structure Standards: MARC, EAD, DC, MODS, VRA Core, CDWA Data Content Standards: AACR2, APPM, CCO, DACS Data Value Standards: LCSH, MeSH, AAT, TGM, ULAN “Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone agrees they’re a good thing but nobody wants to use anyone else’s.” --Rachel Frick

25. “Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone agrees they’re a good thing but nobody wants to use anyone else’s.”--Rachel Frick

26. Type of Standard Old StandardNew Standard(s)? Bibliographic Model NoneFRBR, FRBRoo Metadata Content AACR2RDA Metadata Structure MARC21 Bibliographic RDAVocab Name AuthorityMARC21 Authority FRAD Subject Authority MARC21 Authority FRSAD, SKOS EncodingMARC21XML, XML/RDF

27. What’s Changing? Changes in technology –Impact on descriptive/access data book catalogs card catalogs OPACs next generation Move from individual library to international audience Move from classes of materials to elements and values (more controlled vocabularies)

28. Internet Catalogs are no longer in isolation –Global access to data Integrate bibliographic data with wider Internet environment –Share data beyond institutions

29. Internet “Cloud” Databases, Repositories Services Web front end

30. What’s Changing? Libraries are no longer the first place people come for information –The Internet has changed the way people (including us) behave when seeking information –Our former “granularity consensus” is coming apart To compete effectively for user attention, we must: –Join the larger world of information, where our users are –Learn how the competition attracts users, draws them in, and takes good advantage of their interest in participating –Find a better balance between protecting privacy and capturing usage behavior

31. And Why Must We Do This? –The comfortable certainties we know are coming undone, whether we’re ready or not We have much experience and insight to offer the larger information world (but not everything we’ve learned is relevant) We are collectively about the size of the Queen Mary, unable to turn on a dime—this change will take time I believe resistance is futile—we are not in charge of this new world

32. highlow high stewardship Books Journals Newspapers Gov. docs CD, DVD Maps Scores Special collections Rare books Local/Historical newspapers Local history materials Archives & Manuscripts, Theses & dissertations Research and learning materials ePrints/tech reports Learning objects Courseware E-portfolios Research data Freely-accessible web resources Open source software Newsgroup archives uniqueness Libraries and Information Resources

33. Metadata Standards in a Resource Grid Books Journals Special collections Freely-accessible web resources highlow high stewardship Unique- ness MARC, DC ONIX, MPEG MARC, DC ONIX, MPEG MARC, METS, EAD, DC, TEI, VRA Core, CDWA Lite DC DC, IEEE/LOM, FGDC, EAD, TEI, SCORM Institutional assets Books Journals Newspapers Government docs Audiovisual Maps Scores Freely- accessible web resources Open source software Newsgroup archives Special collections Rare books Local/Historical Newspapers Local history materials Archives & manuscripts Theses & dissertations Institutional repositories ePrints Learning objects/materials Research data Stuart Weibel. Presentation State of the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative Göttingen August 11, 2003 (Based on Lorcan Dempsey Presentation)

34. Information Retrieval Systems Information Professionals Users Back End Staff Interface Front End Find, Gather, Identify, Select, Obtain Search; Browse; Navigate User Interface Description; Access; Vocabulary Control System Reports; Feedback from Users; Usability Testing Serve needs of all users and search types, current & future Progress in human knowledge depends on cumulative scholarship User needs; user-centered design & usability Known Item; Exploratory; Exhaustive

36. typed, then printed From: OCLC../cataloging/cards/

37. Machine- readable catalog.loc.gov

38. online catalog.loc.gov

39. records in a database/catalog

40. think outside the (catalog) box think about our data as data, not as catalog entries. think about our data interacting with other data on the web.

41. WorldCat Identities

43. Obtain Select Identify FRBR user tasks A man walks up to a library catalog…. Find

44. http://www.lib.umn.edu/about/mellon/

45. Web links between documents One meaning: “link” link

46. web pages are mostly text blah blah Moby Dick blah blah whales blah blah blah Herman Melville blah blah blah New Bedford, Massachusetts blah blah blah blah blah Moby Dick blah blah whales blah blah blah Herman Melville blah blah blah New Bedford, Massachusetts blah blah blah

47. web pages are mostly text blah blah Moby Dick blah blah whales blah blah blah Herman Melville blah blah blah New Bedford, Massachusetts blah blah blah blah blah Moby Dick blah blah whales blah blah blah Herman Melville blah blah blah New Bedford, Massachusetts blah blah blah book topic author geo loc

48. identify your entities give them names, identifiers Person: Herman Melville Book: Moby Dick link

49. make links meaningful Person: Herman Melville Book: Moby Dick is author of

50. connect on the web Person: Herman Melville Book: Moby Dick is author of Company: Random House Book is publisher of Topic: Whales & Whaling Book is about

51. meanwhile linked open data http://linkeddata.org

53. Machine- readable catalog.loc.gov

54. Library data as LOD What could you do with it? Darwin, Charles, 1809-1882 family name fore name date birth date death what important world events happened during his lifetime? who was writing on science at the same time? show me a map of important places in his life

55. Charting Our Course

56. Linked Data If “linked data” is about relationships … And we’re done (pretty much) with expressing relationships using textual notes (as we have done for decades— nay, CENTURIES—first on catalog cards, then using AACR and MARC) And we understand that we need machine-based methods to really do the job well

57. Linked Data Availability of schemas and vocabularies –RDA is full of relationships, from the FRBR model to the extensive relationship vocabularies currently registered and near completion Availability of applications and tools that can help us use linked data –Started, certainly, but not entirely there yet

58. What’s All This About Triples? In traditional cataloging, you get attribute/value pairs: Title = Bluebeard Author = Vonnegut, Kurt And you know what the object of the statements are because they’re part of a RECORD

59. What’s All This About Triples? In traditional cataloging, you get a record package, with an ID: Title = Bluebeard Author = Vonnegut, Kurt The record is identifiable and shareable, but the statements within that package cannot stand alone Record ID=abc12345

60. Book Has Author Person

61. Book Has Author Person Has Title Has Name Bluebeard Vonnegut, Kurt

62. Book Has Author Person Has Title Has Name Bluebeard Vonnegut, Kurt Relationships Have Identifiers Object & Agent Have Identifiers Object & Agent Have Identifiers Identifiers are critical for Linked Data! Libraries are used to providing identifiers for Agents and Objects, but not for Relationships

63. Q: How do we make Identifiers for Relationships? A: We already have them, in RDA

64. URI Definition For use with this FRBR entity

65. More specific properties

67. Registered Elements Contain: Names and labels Resolvable URIs (for machine use, primarily) Reciprocal relationships between elements Relationships between RDA Elements and FRBR entities (FRBR entities will be maintained by IFLA) Administrative properties (status, update date, notes, maintainer)

68. 262 Relationships?

69. URI Parent Property Status Language

70. RDA vocabularies metadataregistry.org RDA Groups of Instruments Plucked instruments

71. What We Must Leave Behind A view of metadata based on catalog cards Library software that can’t sort search results better than “random” or “alphabetic” Search interfaces even Librarians hate (and we know the data) Clunky static HTML pages that don’t attract our user’s interest, or guide them well One silo for books, others for journal articles, images, digitized books, etc. (explain that to a user!)

72. Starting to Move Forward A Starting Point: The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control (Library of Congress) –“On the Record”—final report, January 2008 http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/ http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/ –A good, comprehensive overview of our new world and what we need to do –Recommendations for LC, OCLC, ALA, library educators and all of us –Extensively discussed at the Library of Congress and within the profession at large

73. Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control: The Charge Present findings on how bibliographic control and other descriptive practices can effectively support management of and access to library materials in the evolving information and technology environment; Recommend ways in which the library community can collectively move toward achieving this vision; Advise the Library of Congress on its role and priorities.

74. Guiding Principles –Redefine bibliographic control Beyond cataloging, distributed, connected –Redefine the bibliographic universe Commercial, web-enabled, international –Redefine the role of the Library of Congress Not the national library

75. “On the Record” Final Report January 2008 “The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based.” “Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their significance as information providers.” “The library community must look beyond individual libraries and toward a system wide deployment of resources.”

76. Themes Economics: return on investment, incentives Standards: web, metadata Cooperation: vendors, publishers, international Collaboration: dividing the work Users: different needs, levels of access, search strategies –Discovery happens in places not created or controlled by libraries”—Bob Wolven, Columbia Research: more, faster, practical (value)

77. “The Web is our platform” 1.2.4.2 All: Explore tools and techniques for sharing bibliographic data at the network level using both centralized and non-centralized techniques (e.g., OAI-PMH). 3.1.2.1 All: Express library standards in machine-readable and machine-actionable formats, in particular those developed for use on the Web. 3.1.2.2 All: Provide access to standards through registries or Web sites so that the standards can be used by any and all Web applications.

78. A New Look at Library Systems 4.1.1.1 All: Encourage and support development of systems capable of relating evaluative data, such as reviews and ratings, to bibliographic records. 4.1.1.2 All: Encourage the enhancement of library systems to provide the capability to link to appropriate user-added data available via the Internet (e.g., Amazon.com, LibraryThing, Wikipedia). At the same time, explore opportunities for developing mutually beneficial partnerships with commercial entities that would stand to benefit from these arrangements.

79. Enriching Library Data 4.1.2.1 All: Develop library systems that can accept user input and other non-library data without interfering with the integrity of library- created data. 4.1.2.2 All: Investigate methods of categorizing creators of added data in order to enable informed use of user-contributed data without violating the privacy obligations of libraries. 4.1.2.3 All: Develop methods to guide user tagging through techniques that suggest entry vocabulary (e.g., term completion, tag clouds).

80. Approaching Change Catalogers will need to separate what they know about information based on their current systems –Much of the knowledge is portable, but needs updating –The new environment is not as well organized (yet), so much learning will need to be self-directed Catalogers’ role may become closer to that of Metadata Librarian –Managing data at a more abstract level (not yet a stable structure to fit data into) –Understanding of the goals of changes anticipated and new requirements will be essential

81. What’s This Semantic Web? RDF: Resource Description Framework –Statements about Web resources in the form of subject-predicate-object expressions, called triples –E.g. “This presentation” –“has creator” –“Rick Block” RDF Schema –Vocabulary description language of RDF SKOS: Simple Knowledge Organisation System –Expresses the basic structure and content of concept schemes such as thesauri and other types of controlled vocabularies –An RDF application OWL (Web Ontology Language) –Explicitly represents the meaning of terms in vocabularies and the relationships between them

82. Semantic Web Building Blocks Each component of an RDF statement (triple) is a “resource” RDF is about making machine- processable statements, requiring –A machine-processable language for representing RDF statements Extensible Markup Language (XML) –A system of machine-processable identifiers for resources (subjects, predicates, objects) Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) For full machine-processing potential, an RDF statement is a set of three URIs

83. Things Requiring Identification Object “This presentation” –e.g. its electronic location (URL) Predicate “has creator” –e.g. http://purl.org/dc/terms/creatorhttp://purl.org/dc/terms/creator Object “Rick Block” –e.g. URI of entry in Library of Congress Name Authority File –NAF: nr2001015786nr2001015786 Declaring vocabularies/values in SKOS and OWL provides URIs—essential for the Semantic Web

84. What Happened to XML? Nothing: XML (eXtensible Markup Language) is most likely how library systems will evolve after MARC –It makes sense to use XML to exchange data between libraries, and some external services –But RDF is gaining ground, and libraries will need to be able to accommodate it, and understand it An XML record is essentially an aggregation of property = value statements about the same resource –RDF triples can also be aggregated using XML, but this isn’t necessarily the best way to realize the potential of RDF

85. From library catalog to LOD FRBR leads the way

86.  Collocation Better organization to catalog More options to display »Identifying elements »Pathways ☑ Simplify cataloging enabling links and re-use of identifying elements FRBR Benefits

87. Objectives of a catalog: display All the works associated with a person, etc. All the expressions of the same work All the manifestations of the same expression All items/copies of the same manifestation Collocation Shakespeare Hamlet Romeo and Juliet English French German Swedish Stockholm 2008 Columbia University Copy 1 Green leather binding

88. Pathways to Related Works Hamlet Stockholm 2008 English Swedish French German Shakespeare Columbia University Copy 1 Green leather binding Romeo and Juliet Stoppard Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead Text Movies … Derivative works Subject

89. Collocation by Works Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616.  All’s well that ends well  As you like it  Hamlet  Macbeth  Midsummer night’s dream  …

90. Collocation by Family of Works and Expressions Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. +Texts +Motion Pictures +Sound Recordings

91. Collocation by Expressions Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. +Texts – Danish +Texts – Dutch +Texts – English +Texts – French +Texts – Spanish +Motion Pictures – English +Sound Recordings - English

92. Collocation of Manifestations Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616. Hamlet. - Motion pictures – English + 1964 Director, Bill Collegan + 1990 Director, Kevin Kline, Kirk Browning + 1990 Director, Franco Zeffirelli + 1992 Director, Maria Muat + 1996 Director, Kenneth Branagh + 2000 Director, Campbell Scott, Eric Simonson

93. FRBR Display - Serial  Atlantic monthly  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1993-)  Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1981-1992)  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1971- 1980)  Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1932-1970)  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1857- 1931)

94. FRBR Display - Serial  Atlantic monthly  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1993-)  Online  Paper  Microfilm  Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1981-1992)  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1971-1980)  Atlantic (Boston, Mass. : 1932-1970)  Atlantic monthly (Boston, Mass. : 1857-1931)

95. Circulation: Place holds at “Work” or “Expression” level rather than only at manifestation level (VTLS and OCLC demonstrate this) Hamlet English FRBR Benefits

96. What can we do? 1.Make our data harvestable so that others can use it 2.Identify our data structures and vocabularies for use on the web

97. vocabularies easy to ‘webify’ languages places resource types roles names subjects

98. MARC vocabularies id.loc.gov

99. RDA vocabularies metadataregistr y.org

100. What can we do? 1. Make our data harvestable so that others can use it 2. Identify our data structures and vocabularies for use on the web 3. Make our data more ‘data-like’ 4. Make our systems more ‘cloud-like’

102. “Standards are like toothbrushes, everyone agrees they’re a good thing but nobody wants to use anyone else’s.”--Rachel Frick

103. Type of Standard Old StandardNew Standard(s)? Bibliographic Model NoneFRBR, FRBRoo Metadata Content AACR2RDA Metadata Structure MARC21 Bibliographic RDAVocab Name AuthorityMARC21 Authority FRAD Subject Authority MARC21 Authority FRSAD, SKOS EncodingMARC21XML, XML/RDF

104. RDA Cataloging Scenarios Scenario 1: –Database or Linked Data structure Scenario 2 –Linked bibliographic and authority records Scenario 3 –‘Flat file’ (no links)

105. Database/format Scenarios Bib record (Catalog Card - flat-file) Lee, T. B. Cataloguing has a future Spoken word Audio disc 1. Metadata Donated by the author Based on Gordon Dunsire’s slideVia Barbara Tillett

106. Database/format Scenarios Bib record (flat-file) Author: Title: Content type: Carrier type: Provenance: Subject: Lee, T. B. Cataloguing has a future Spoken word Audio disc Metadata Donated by the author Name authority record Name: Subject authority record Identifier: … Label: Identifier: … Bib record (description) Item information Manifestation information Expression information Work information FRBR record RDA content type registry Label: Identifier: … Spoken word RDA element registry RDA carrier type registry Future record ONIX FRBR registry Based on Gordon Dunsire’s slide Work title: Cataloguing has a future

107. Author: Title: Content type: Carrier type: Provenance: Subject: Lee, T. B. Cataloguing has a future Audio disc Metadata Donated by the author Name authority record Name: Subject authority record Identifier: … Label: Identifier: … Item information Manifestation information Expression information Work information RDA content type registry Label: Identifier: … Spoken word RDA carrier type registry Linked Data Work Title: Cataloguing has a future Cataloguing has a future

108. Author: Title: Content type: Carrier type: Provenance: Subject: Lee, T. B. Cataloguing has a future Audio disc Metadata Donated by the author Name authority record Name: Subject authority record Identifier: … Label: Identifier: … Item information Manifestation information Expression information Work information RDA content type registry Label: Identifier: … Spoken word RDA carrier type registry Package for Data Sharing Lee, T. B. Metadata Spoken word Audio disc Work Title: Cataloguing has a future Cataloguing has a future Communication format record

109. Future of MARC Discussion of the future of MARC is only partially about MARC –The broader digital information landscape –Technologies –Cataloging practices –The diminishing market share of: Libraries in the information marketplace Library catalogs as a resource discovery tool

110. MARC’s Richness Metadata record with approximately 2,000 elements available –Approximately 200 fields –Approximately 1800 subfields or other structures To what extent is the richness/complexity exploited –MARC Content Designation and Utilization Analysis (William Moen and Shawne Miksa) –For book and serial records 34,546,200 records from OCLC WorldCat –90% of occurrences: 28 fields 7,595,887 records from LC –90% of occurrences: 21 fields –Results similar to a 1997 German study of field usage for LC records

111. MARCXML Millions of rich descriptive records in MARC systems: can be reused in an XML environment using MARCXML MARCXML uses the MARC data element set in an XML syntax Allows interoperability with other XML schemes by taking advantage of free XML tools Allows for collaborative use of metadata for access (e.g. OAI) Provides continuity with current data and flexible transition options

112. MARCXML MARCXML record –XML exact equivalent of MARC record –Lossless/roundtrip conversion to/from MARC 21 record –Simple flexible XML schema, no need to change when MARC 21 changes –Presentations using XML stylesheets –LC provides converters (open source) http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml

113. MARC 21 evolution to XML

114. Library of Congress Study of the North American MARC Records Marketplace The Charge: –to investigate and describe current approaches to the creation and distribution of MARC records in North America –to focus on the economics of existing practices –to determine the degree of reliance on LC records

115. The Findings There is confusion in the market about the real cost and/or value of MARC records. The market provides insufficient incentives to stimulate additional original cataloging. The market for cataloging records is genuinely conflicted.

116. Does MARC Have a Future? Yes, No, Maybe … Yes … –Because it will take some unknown number of years to move our legacy data to a more modern, FRBR-aware format –Because our community is still largely using MARC, and we’ll need to retain the ability to communicate in MARC until we build tools to do something else –Because the wiring in our heads is still MARC …

117. Yes, No, Maybe … No … –Because in order to keep MARC available to those who need it to be sustainable in the interim, we need to freeze further changes, sooner rather than later, otherwise we raise costs for everyone –Because MARC is best for flat files, and most of us want to take advantage of the advanced browsing we can do with FRBR-style records –RDA really can’t be used with MARC, unless we want to go forward on our hands and knees …

118. Yes, No, Maybe … Maybe … –If you define ‘future’ in a very limited way, say, the next 5-8 years –If you recognize that RDA is very influenced by our experience with MARC, particularly in the area of vocabularies, thus the shadow of RDA may always look something like MARC –Because MARC will always be in our heads, just like our mother’s voices are …

119. Do We Need A Replacement? Only if we think we need to protect our data from the world, or the world from our data …

120. Instead, We Could … Use RDA –It’s a FRBR-based, bibliographic vocabulary presented in a more modern form, including some familiar ideas –The elements, sub-elements, and vocabularies can be used with XML encoding or as part of RDF triples –The data is easily used and understood by other communities who are used to exchanging XML data –RDA elements and vocabularies can easily be extended by specialized communities whose needs are not entirely met by RDA out-of-the-box

121. Why Does This Strategy Work? Might help to look at what “interoperability” means in our context Wikipedia cites the IEEE definition: –“ … the ability of two or more systems or components to exchange information and to use the information that has been exchanged” Libraries have understood this concept primarily within the context of MARC and our long history of data exchange

122. Let’s Think Again About Our Needs We definitely hear questions: –If we want to join the world of data “out there,” will we have to redo all our older data? –What would it take to achieve a reasonable level of interoperability fairly quickly? –Where should we start?

123. Joining the World of Data To participate fully we need to think about making our data available broadly AND using data created outside libraries effectively A “bespoke” data format is not the best way to do this RDA is a good first step, but we have a significant amount of work yet to realize its potential Recent announcement of Library Linked Data Incubator Group

124. More thoughts on Beyond MARC The “cult of MARC” could keep us from seeing or moving ahead I am a founding member of the “cult of MARC” –HILCC –Geospatial catalog –Archival collections portal MARC does limit our ability to share and exchange data outside of libraries while the creation of metadata outside of libraries is undergoing exponential growth

125. More thoughts on Beyond MARC There seems to be a lack of leadership for moving beyond MARC Ironic that we continue to fund projects to develop library software based on MARC even though we consider the format long overdue for replacement Although MODS improves on some problems found in MARC, it doesn’t seem to represent a real philosophical shift from MARC –It’s a better MARC XML but not incredibly web- friendly

126. More thoughts on Beyond MARC Remember that MARC was developed in the 1960s for totally different purposes and functionality than we want to see today MARC is a standard that, despite its “machine readability”, is deeply steeped in the history of the card catalog. MARC was designed to carry information based on the card– information that is necessarily heavy on textual strings (a huge issue in the digital age

127. More thoughts on Beyond MARC MARC is a great standard; we need a standard to replace it The new standard should focus on data elements, not record format If we standardize the data elements, then any record format can be used MARC standardizes both (and not necessarily very well by today’s technology) in a way that they cannot be easily separated

128. More thoughts on Beyond MARC Continuing to wrangle with changing MARC, trying to wedge it into today’s systems, while at the same time changing how we do shared cataloging in order to accommodate an outdated, inflexible standard seems like it will be way more expensive in the long run than starting fresh. If MARC is already so woefully underutilized for our current practice and if our vendors cannot seem to make it work for us in this new environment, why bring it forward with us

129. Once upon a time…. penmanship was a required course

130. RDA: Wikipedia Disambiguation Radioactive Dentin Abrasion Redland Railway Station Recommended Daily Allowance Remote Database Access Reader's Digest Association Retirement Date Announced

132. Developed for the future When authority and bibliographic data reside in separate “packages” –Records assembled when needed When access points (if needed) can be assembled “on the fly” When data for works and expressions can be reused for multiple manifestations

133. RDA: New ways of doing cataloging New infrastructure for cataloging will develop over time, using the service of registries and Internet protocols for data linking RDA represents an initial step –Supports the models for entities and relationships –Provides a bridge to the new data structures

134. What can we do? 1.Make our data harvestable so that others can use it 2.Identify our data structures and vocabularies for use on the web 3.Make our data more ‘data-like’ 4.Make our systems more ‘cloud-like’

136. There’s no place like home

137. OCLC: NEW Rec stat: n Entered: 20030207 Replaced: 20030207 Used: 20030207 Type: r ELvl: I Srce: d Audn: Ctrl: Lang: dog BLvl: m Form: GPub : Time: nnn MRec: Ctry: mou Desc: a TMat: r Tech: n DtSt: m Dates: 1999,9999 040 $a ZCU $c ZCU 020 $a 101010101 : $c priceless 090 $a SF429.S64 $b R62 1999 092 $a 636.76 $2 21 049 $a ZPSA 245 00 $a Toto $h [realia] : $b beloved pet / $c raised and loved by Rick Block and Bill Vosburg. 246 1 $i Previously known as: $a Rocky 260 $a Missouri : $b Farm, $c 1999- 300 $a 1 dog : $b male, black and white, 18 lbs. ; $c 51 x 33 cm. 490 1 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1 650 0 $a Shih tzu. 830 0 $a Block/Vosburg dog series ; $v no. 1.

138. Jesse Shera's Two Laws of Cataloguing:  Law #1 No cataloguer will accept the work of any other cataloguer.  Law #2 No cataloguer will accept his/her own work six months after the cataloguing. University of Illinois, Graduate School of Library Science. Dec. 1977.

139. To err is human. To find your OWN mistakes before anyone else does…. that is truly divine.

141. “You see, I don’t believe that libraries should be drab places where people sit in silence, and that’s been the main reason for our policy of employing wild animals as librarians” – Monty Python skit.