Continuing Resources Cataloging Committee Update Forum

Continuing Resources Cataloging Committee Update Forum
January 14, 2008
1:30-3:30 pm

Yee Cataloging Rules, or, Alternative RDA: an experiment in designing a different approach to FRBR-izing the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules with a focus on the rules for continuing resources by Martha Yee, UCLA Film & Television Archive and Ed Jones, National University

(MY=Martha Yee)

Personal experiment (not an institutional experiment)

Quick summary – experiment in designing rules to guide catalogers in mapping data elements to FRBR group 1 entities, so that the resulting records can be used to build FRBR-ized displays.

One of the questions to answer — RDA maps to manifestation, can we map to expression?

Perhaps our entity definitions can be brought more in line with what MY thinks is the users’ entity definitions. The Yee rules discard the change-of-name-is-change-of-identity principal.

Experiment in data modeling. Working on an RDF model of the resultant rules to try to find weak spots in RDF where it cannot accommodate our data. MY is trying to learn about data modeling, so we don’t recreate our mistakes with the designs of OPACs where catalogers were not involved and/or didn’t understand the system design.

Continuing resources – identify work by latest title in conjunction with principal creator, if applicable. Let catalogers determine when principal cataloger is useful.

Serials – new work created only by splits and mergers, not by title change, not by restarting the numbering

Change in identity might be new work, but not knee-jerk reaction to change of title.

Expressions for simultaneously released editions, such as different languages or newspaper editions for different markets.

MY introduced a new entity to the FRBR set called “title-manifestation”, sitting between expression and manifestation.

Minor title changes would be summarized in the title-manifestation description

For monographs, a title-manifestation might be an expression of a work that is simultaneously published in the United States and Great Britain under two different titles with identical content. Cutter called this a “title edition”. MY thinks this concept was always missing in FRBR.

The problem with expression is that it is tied to changes in content. But with serials, every single issue changes content. Big culture clash between monographs & serials.

A serial is a hollow shell containing other works that constantly change content.

In serials, a manifestation is used for a different physical format or for copies distributed differently (print, electronic, different URLs, etc.)

MY then presented degression, which is different from RDA/AACR2. Degression:

  • work level: all data elements that apply to every expression/title-manifestation/manifestation of the work.
  • Everything at work level applies to every expression
  • Everything at expression level applies to every title-manifestation
  • Everything at title-manifestation level applies to every manifestation


  • Same data elements might end up migrating up & down the FRBR levels as its nature changes over time
  • For example, if all expressions, title-manifestations and manifestations of a work are illustrated, the illustration goes at the work level and is not repeated at any lower level.
  • But a title change could coincide with the illustrations ceasing, in which case the illustration statement needs to move to the lower level.
  • A computer could move data elements up and down as appropriate.

No record structure specified in the rules (like RDA is trying to do).

Disagreeing with RDA, MY argues that cataloging *is* display. In the Yee rules, manifestation data would be incomprehensible if displayed without the context provided by title-manifestations, expression, and work data. Includes recommendations for displays. The model must support displays.

Do users really consider change of name to be change of identity?

MY believes this principal is a major source of confusion for users.

MY believes our entity definitions would be more likely to agree internationally if we dropped this principal.

If we could agree on entity definitions internationally, the VIAF would be a lot easier. Each community could use their heading of choice in their language & script of choice

RDF model, problems listed on blog:

MY hopes this exercise will be a vehicle to help us, as a community, learn more about RDF, so we are better equipped to evaluate RDF data models for our cataloging data.

Model the data to support display

Experimental demonstration to try to make the ideas more concrete

No expectation that anyone would actually implement

Ed Jones commented on the Yee code

3 principals

  • Commonly known name
  • Uniform identifier
  • Faithful transcription

Abstract – to – concrete

Likes degression

Can it be done?

  • Newly non-unique elements must move down the hierarchy as new nonconforming expressions or manifestations are added

What is the context?

  • Can only take place within a given system
  • UNLESS there is 1 Big System

Continuation v. Supersession

  • No distinction in AACR2
  • [burned our bridges]

If a change in corporate name doesn’t necessarily mean a change in identity (new record), it is often difficult to determine at any given moment in time when a corporate name change is significant.

LC/ISSN report by Regina Reynolds, Library of Congress

  • CONSER Standard Report implemented at LC
  • Relatively few problems & questions
  • 130s for digitized newspapers, still need to qualify by place
  • Jettisoning of frequency & regularity in fixed fields is causing problems for the ISSN register in Paris. So, records will now have a least frequency. 310 doesn’t display in ISSN register.
  • NDSP now does selection for the LC collection when titles come in for ISSNs
  • Copy catalogers are doing full description
  • Catalogers are learning acquisitions tasks
  • Serial Record Division is now using copyright records to start.
  • Revision to ISSN standard published in August
  • Will populate ISSN-L in Paris Register (the register underpins the Portal. It’ll be a little while before ISSN-L gets added to the portal)
  • Table will be created to go from linking ISSN to medium specific ISSNs (and vice versa) and will be downloadable.
  • They are almost ready to assign ISSN to integrating resources
  • ISSN manual to be revised

CONSER report (by Regina Reynolds for Les Hawkins, CONSER)

  • Anniversaries of both CONSER and of SCCTP
  • Integrating Resources Cataloging Manual being updated
  • PCC Series Task Group discussion paper. Comments due by January 18th. Available on PCC webpage.

CC:DA report by Kevin Randall, Northwestern University

  • CC:DA responded to chapters 6-7 draft
  • Appointed a webmaster
  • CC:DA webdata moving to ALA website
  • Go read: Differences between, changes within @ Free to ALA members
  • They will wait to see what final draft of RDA looks like to see if RDA will need a similar document.
  • Are pointers to specialized cataloging manuals from RDA appropriate/necessary? There are a few relevant serials documents (CONSER Cataloging Manual). If you have opinions, send comments to Kevin.
  • MARBI report:
  • Green light was given for 440 discussion paper to return as a proposal.
  • $3 for series added entry field will return as a proposal.
  • Much discussion about the discussion paper on encoding RDA in MARC21

RDA report by Kevin Randall, Northwestern University

  • JSC met in October. Major change in the organization of the material. Attempt to more closely align with FRBR.
  • Now divided into 10 sections encompassing 37 chapters
  • Sections 2-4 and 9 are for review currently up on JSC website
  • Extensive discussion on the current draft.
  • Review period ends February 7.
  • CC:DA deadline is February 10.
  • Kevin is chairing the task force for CRCC & he will set a deadline for the taskforce.
  • ALA Publishing has contracted for the electronic version. Hope is that there will be a prototype in 4 weeks (non-functional). Summer full draft will hopefully be in a functional version of the electronic product.
  • Full draft will likely not be available before ALA Annual and so CC:DA will likely not meet on Friday afternoon in Anaheim
This entry was posted in ALA Midwinter 2008. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *