** REPORTS FROM THE **
2006 ALA Annual Conference
New Orleans, Louisiana
Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information Committee (MARBI)
Liaison Report
submitted by John Attig
Pennsylvania State University
The Machine-Readable Bibliographic Information (MARBI) Committee and the USMARC Advisory Committee met for two sessions during the ALA Annual Conference in New Orleans, Louisiana. The following is a summary of the meeting. More information is available on the MARC Advisory Committee Web page at <http://www.loc.gov/marc/marcadvz.html>.
Proposal No. 2006-06: Recording Geographic Coordinates in the Authority Format
This proposal called for adding Field 034 (Coded Cartographic Mathematical Data) to the Authority Format, so that geographic coordinates can be added to headings for geographic names. This information would support searching based on coordinates; the heading retrieved in the authority records could be used to retrieve relevant bibliographic records.
MARBI approved the proposal to add the second indicator and subfields $d-g, j, k, m, n, p, r, s, t, x, y, z, 2, 6 and 8 to the Authorities format (the other subfields, such as those for scale and projection are only relevant in bibliographic records). Seven of these subfields--$r (Distance from earth), $x (Beginning date), $y (Ending date), $z (Name of extraterrestrial body), $2 (Source), $6 (Linkage) and $8 (Field link and sequence number)--will also be added to Field 034 in the Bibliographic format.
Proposal No. 2006-07: Definition of Subfield $u (URI) in Field 852 (Location)
This proposal calls for adding subfield $u (URI) to Field 852 (Location), so that contact information about the repository holding a resource can be provided through a link to the repository’s Website. The proposal was approved.
Proposal No. 2006-08: Addition of Subfield $r in Field 865 to Accommodate Date of Issuance for Indexes
This proposal--developed from Discussion Paper 2006-DP05--is based on a feature of the ONIX Serial Release Notice, which distinguishes between the coverage dates of an index and its issue date. MARBI approved the proposal with two changes: 1) subfield $v will be used instead of $r; 2) the subfield will be defined as the date of issuance of an index.
Proposal No. 2006-09: Lossless Technique for Conversion of Unicode to MARC-8
At the Midwinter Meeting, MARBI approved a technique for converting Unicode to MARC-8 when there is no equivalent MARC-8 character. The technique approved called for a generic placeholder to represent such characters. It was noted at the time that this technique did not allow "round-trip" mapping, and that a "lossless" technique should be developed to allow "round-trip" mapping without loss of meaning ("lossless" being defined in this context as a coding for the characters such that they can be fully recovered upon re-conversion to Unicode). This proposal provides such a technique, using the numeric hex representation of the character. MARBI approved the proposal, with the following two technical clarifications: 1) the representation should include at least 4 characters with zero fill; 2) upper-case alphabetic characters should be used.
Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP04: Data Elements Needed to Ascertain Copyright Facts
This discussion paper suggests that certain facts relating to rights, if known and recorded in a bibliographic record, might assist users in making judgments about the copyright status of a resource. MARBI found the discussion interesting, and suggested that it be extended to cover (a) non-U.S. rights information, and (b) more complex rights situations (e.g., where rights are shared among a number of persons). A further discussion paper will be prepared.
Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP06: Defining Separate Subfields for Language Codes of Summaries/Abstracts and Subtitles/Captions in Field 041
OLAC had been asked to prepare a proposal to separate the two conditions currently coded in subfield $b of Field 041. MARBI discussed whether such a change was worth the cost, but decided to proceed with a proposal; they preferred to redefine subfield $b as language of summaries or abstracts, and to define a new subfield for language of subtitles or captions.
Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP07: Recording Set Information for Multipart Cartographic Materials
This discussion paper looks at multipart cartographic materials (e.g., map series), and analyzes what data elements need to be recorded for individual pieces within such a set; it also lists the different techniques for describing such resources. The point is that creation of individual bibliographic records for each sheet in large sets is not cost effective, and that use of holdings records for piece-level information should be considered.
MARBI was intrigued by the discussion, and saw implications for analysis of multipart resources more generally. A further discussion paper that includes an analysis of non-cartographic resources will be prepared.
Discussion Paper No. 2006-DP08: Techniques for Incorporation of Former Headings into MARC 21 Authority Records
This discussion paper is a second look at techniques for recording information about former headings in authority records, particularly in cases in which the former heading may not be unique and therefore may not be appropriate for machine update. The two alternate techniques put forward for consideration were (1) use of the 4xx reference fields, and (2) use of a note field. MARBI expressed a preference for the first alternative; a proposal will be prepared that will look at the use of 4xx fields for former headings; the range of dates during which the former heading was valid are to be specified in subfield $i, and a code will be defined in subfield $w to identify the heading as a formerly-valid heading.
Other Business:
MARBI heard reports from:
The Deutsche Bibliothek, which is leading the effort of German and Austrian libraries to adopt the MARC 21 formats. They are developing proposals to deal with missing or conflicting data elements, and are looking particularly at (a) multi-volume works; (b) linking records; and (c) the MARC character sets. They expect to have proposals or a discussion paper for MARBI to consider at Midwinter 2007.
The MARC Content Designation Utilization Project, which is collecting data at a high level of granularity about the content of the catalog record, based on the WorldCat database. For further information, see <http://www.mcdu.unt.edu/>. The Project will be presenting a program at the 2007 Annual Conference.
Jennifer Bowen on the development of RDA: Resource Description and Access, the forthcoming successor to AACR2. Jennifer indicated that a discussion paper on issues related to the implementation of RDA would be prepared for the 2007 Midwinter Meeting.
<=========><><><>O<><><><=========>
Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA)
Liaison Report
submitted by Greta de Groat
Stanford University Libraries
RDA Discussions and Actions at ALA Annual in New Orleans
The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) met in April to discuss RDA. They identified and discussed several major issues, and therefore were not able to get to the over 700 specific comments on the draft of Part 1. These will be handled over the next few months using a "triage" system, as they did to handle the comments on AACR2. CC:DA members and liaisons are to look at a table of comments from the various constituencies and identify areas of disagreement.
Highlights of the outcomes. Because of the concern that the distinction between description and access was becoming blurred, and because other communities do not make this distinction, RDA will be structured in just two parts by combining Parts I and II into a single part (Part A), and the former Part III will be Part B. To show relationships between data elements in the absence of ISBD punctuation, JSC decided to establish hierarchical relationships between elements. For example, the high level element, "Title" would have subtypes, "Variant title", "Parallel title", "Title proper", etc. It is not yet clear how these would be stored and displayed. Options will be clarified and more clearly labeled, and at the beginning of the guidelines will be text to indicate if an element is "required", "required if applicable", or "optional". Some data elements, such as "Technical details", will be divided into separate optional sub-elements. Other data elements that are currently in notes, such as additional dates and places, will also be defined as separate data elements in their own right. Notes will be redefined to be additional information relating to other data elements. Transcription continued to be an issue. Elements identified as transcribed fields are: "Title", "Statement of responsibility", "Edition", "Publisher, distributor, etc.", "Place of publication" and "Series". The controversial option to use an access point in lieu of the statement of responsibility was retained because of strong support from other constituencies and some libraries.
JSC is working with the publishing community to develop a framework for resource categorization that can be used in both RDA and ONIX standards. This framework will be used as the basis for drafting instructions for the RDA elements, "Media category", "Type of carrier", and "Type and form of content". ALA will have an opportunity to respond to a draft of this framework by mid-September, and JSC will discuss it at the October meeting. The framework is theoretically complex, but catalogers may end up working instead with pre-set categories of resources based on it. These categories would be much easier to record and more appropriate to display to catalog users. JSC also discussed the need for a mapping between RDA and MARC21 data elements, and a draft mapping is targeted for submission to MARBI for discussion at Midwinter.
CC:DA Actions and Discussions, June 2006
The section formerly known as RDA Part 2, was issued just before ALA, and is available publicly at the JSC Website. This is much shorter than Part 1, consisting of only two chapters: Ch. 6, on bibliographic relationships, and Ch. 7, on access points. Most of the CC:DA meeting time was spent on discussing this draft. Bibliographic relationships include such aspects as related resources, reproductions and their original manifestations, previous and succeeding resources, contents of collections, etc. Constituents were asked to react to proposals for an embedded description, a technique many found unclear. An option was given for parallel description of an original and reproduction, with encoding to differentiate between them. There was a long discussion concerning whether or not main entry (now called "primary access point") was still necessary, the general opinion being that, while a coded work identifier was a theoretical possibility, systems are still far from being able to accommodate it, so a primary access point for citation purposes is still necessary. A major change from current practice limits principal performer main entry. A section on performances caused general consternation, as it was unclear exactly what constituted a performance vs. an adaptation that was a new work. A lack of guidelines for works of mixed responsibility causes confusion in how to determine the primary access point for most video materials. A prototype of the RDA online version can be found at <http://www.rdaonline.org/>.
Other CC:DA activities included reports on:
The Task Force to Maintain Differences Between/Changes Within, who have submitted their text to the ALCTS office for proofreading
The ALA representative to NISO reported that apparently the NISO standard for digital still images has been adopted, and that ISO is working on an International Standard Party Identifier.