Cataloging Unique Collections with RDA and Non-MARC Standards Melanie Wacker Metadata Coordinator Columbia University Libraries Jan. 21, 2012 ALA Midwinter 1

RDA--Resource Description & Access New cataloging code developed by the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC) to replace AACR2 Based on AACR2 Conceptual models: FRBR and FRAD Consists of the content standard, RDA elements and value vocabularies "RDA provides a comprehensive set of guidelines and instructions covering all types of content and media."  ("Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA," last modified December 9, 2010, http://www.rda-jsc.org/ )   2

Non-MARC Records in the U.S. RDA Test 10,570 MARC bibliographic records and 12,800 authority records created by the 26 test partners Common Original Set: 5 Dublin Core records Extra Original Set: 25 in Dublin Core, 22 in MODS, and 2 in EAD Non-MARC records mostly “describing unpublished resources” “... Non-MARC records provided a very detailed level of description” RDA core elements not applied consistently (U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee. (2011). Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee, 149, 66-67, accessed Dec. 29, 2011 http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/source/rdatesting-finalreport-20june2011.pdf) 3

Test Issues No benchmark records Training focused on MARC and published resources In Libraries non-MARC standards are generally used to catalog unique collections No shared cataloging utility for non-MARC format records Test focused on RDA as a content standard 4

Non-MARC Testing at CUL Non-MARC records created by the Metadata Coordinator with support from members of CUL's Metadata Group.  Metadata Coordinator participated in RDA training (all MARC based) Non-MARC standards used: MODS (11), Dublin Core (2), EAD (2) Resources for the test were selected from various digital projects representing CUL's unique collections. 5

Resources Cataloged at CUL  2 Websites of Human rights organizations (Dublin Core) 2 Finding aids for archival collections (EAD) 2 Digitized pamphlets (MODS) 3 Digital projects (MODS) 1 Digitized drawing (MODS) 1 Digitized envelope (MODS) 1 Digitized photograph (MODS) 1 Digitized invoice (MODS) 1 Digitized painting (MODS) 1 Digitized rare book (MODS) 6

Relationship Designators Issues One-to-one Principle Relationships FRBR Relationship Designators Core Elements 7

One resource = one description One-to-one Principle One resource = one description 8

MODS description combining both digital and analog into one single record. MODS Aquifer Guidelines recommend that “metadata about content and digital and analog carriers all appear in the main record.” “Digital Library Federation/Aquifer Implementation guidelines for shareable metadata records (version 1.1), access Jan. 6, 2012, https://wiki.dlib.indiana.edu/download/attachments/24288/DLFMODS_Impl ementationGuidelines.pdf 9

RDA Rules on Reproductions: Two separate description sets with the physical description area referring to the respective formats. The JPEG image of a premiere announcement on the top and the description of the actual physical item on the bottom. RDA Rules on Reproductions: Base the description on the facsimile or reproduction (RDA 1.11) 10

Relationships Electronic reproduction of (item)? Electronic reproduction of (manifestation)? 11

Courtesy of The Biggert Collection of Architectural Vignettes on Commercial Stationery, Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library, Columbia University. 12

The elephant in the room: FRBR 13

What is the work? Courtesy of The Biggert Collection of Architectural Vignettes on Commercial Stationery, Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library, Columbia University. 14

Relationship Designators MODS EAD 15

RDA Core Elements for Manifestation and Item (0.6.2) Title proper Copyright Date Statement of Responsibility Series Statement Edition statement Identifier (Manifestation) Numbering of Serials Carrier Type Production Statement (core if) Extent Publication Statement (core if: Distribution or Manufacture Statement) 16

Statement of Responsibility “A statement associated with the title proper of a resource that relates to the identification and/or function of any persons, families, or corporate bodies responsible for the creation of, or contributing to the realization of, the intellectual or artistic content of the resource.” (RDA Glossary) 17

RDA Value Vocabularies On the Plus Side … RDA Value Vocabularies RDA Vocabularies 18

RDA Value Vocabularies Physical description using mostly controlled vocabularies. 19

RDA Vocabularies Open Metadata Registry 20

id.loc.gov . 21

Qualified Dublin Core Local extension of the Qualified Dublin Core schema. 22

Conclusions Best practices Documentation Testing

Selected References Slide 2: “Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA,” last modified December 9, 2010, http://www.rda-jsc.org/ Slide 3: U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee. (2011). Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee, accessed Dec. 29, 2011 http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/source/rdatesting-finalreport- 20june2011.pdf Slide 9: “Digital Library Federation/Aquifer Implementation guidelines for shareable metadata records (version 1.1), access Jan. 6, 2012, https://wiki.dlib.indiana.edu/download/attachments/24288/DLFMODS_Implem entationGuidelines.pdf Slide 14: Murtha Baca and Sherman Clarke, "FRBR and Works of Art, Architecture, and Material Culture," in Understanding FRBR: What it is and How It Will Affect Our Retrieval Tools, ed. Arlene G. Taylor (Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited, 2007): 103-110. Matthew Beacom, “Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO), Resource Description and Access (RDA), and the Future of Metadata Content,” VRA Bulletin, vol. 34, no. 1 (Spring 2007)

Slide 20: Open Metadata Registry: The RDA (Resource Description and Access) Vocabularies, http://rdvocab.info/ Slide 22: Myung-Ja Han, Melanie Wacker, and Judith Dartt, “Testing Resource Description and Access (RDA) with Dublin Core,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications (2011): 165-170, http://hdl.handle.net/10022/AC:P:11931 More information on the non-MARC testing experience can be found in: Melanie Wacker, Myung-Ja Han, and Judith Dartt, “Testing Resource Description and Access (RDA) with Non-MARC Metadata Standards,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly (2011), 49:655-675

Thank you! Melanie Wacker mw2064@columbia.edu 26