ALA Annual in San Francisco
CC:DA
Saturday, June 27, 2015 and Monday, June 29, 2015
Tracey Snyder, Music Library Association liaison to CC:DA
Please see the CC:DA blog for the complete agenda and links to many reports and documents.
After introductions, adoption of the agenda, and approval of the minutes of the previous meeting, the chair, Robert Rendall, gave a report on CC:DA motions and other actions , January-June 2015, which were related to the work of task forces appointed to review new documents, including DCRM(M) (Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Materials (Music)).
Library of Congress Report (Dave Reser)
Reser reported on personnel changes (including the upcoming retirement of Librarian of Congress James Billington), recent improvements to the Cataloger’s Desktop interface, continued development of the ALA-LC romanization tables, RDA Toolkit updates, maintenance of the LC-PCC PSs, LC implementation of PCC’s 2015 training manual for applying relationship designators in bibliographic records, the upcoming Phase 3B of the conversion of the LC/NACO Authority File to RDA (which will entail the addition of many ISNI identifiers but no changes to 1XX headings), the continued enhancement of LC’s online catalog, and maintenance of LC’s Linked Data service.
Reser also reported on the upcoming LC BIBFRAME pilot, which will seek to answer questions about the feasibility of inputting native BIBFRAME data, the usefulness of “type-ahead” features in an inputting tool, and the adaptability of library data to a Linked Data environment. The pilot is also expected to yield revisions to the BIBFRAME vocabulary. Reser also mentioned the 2014 BIBFRAME AV Modeling Study , which will be followed in summer 2015 by an investigation of the relationship between PREMIS (for preservation metadata) and BIBFRAME (for descriptive metadata).
Report on JSC Activities, January-June 2015 (Kathy Glennan)
Glennan’s document includes a list of JSC working groups (including groups on aggregates, fictitious entities, and relationship designators), a list of documents reviewed by the JSC (including FRBRoo, which is supposed to be compatible with the future FR consolidated model and may provide a glimpse of what that model will provide), and a list of ALA fast-track proposals (including revisions to relationship designators in RDA appendices I, J, and K). Glennan recommended that CC:DA form a group to review the FR consolidated model when it is released and submit a formal response. Fast-track proposals were approved with one notable exception–the addition of “transgender” RDA 9.7.1.3 and Glossary. The JSC deferred action on this specific proposal and stated that it will review the treatment of gender and other personal data in RDA.
Glennan has been analyzing the use of the terms “transcribe” and “record” in RDA Chapter 2 and will make recommendations to the JSC for editorial clarifications.
The JSC’s annual meeting will take place in Edinburgh, Scotland, November 2-6, 2015.
Proposal from TF on Machine-Actionable Data Elements in RDA Chapter 3 (Francis Lapka and Diane Hillmann)
The task force’s proposal, based on their Midwinter strawman proposal, is in six sections: Measurements, Extent of the Carrier, Pagination and Foliation, Dimensions, Extent of the Content, and Duration. The proposal further develops the “Type-Unit-Quantity” model that was devised by the task force. Various questions posed within the document were discussed.
There was a great deal of discussion of the treatment of numbered and unnumbered pages (etc.) and blank pages (etc.). The task force asked if the distinction between numbered and unnumbered pages (etc.) should be made in the proposed Pagination and Foliation element, but not in the Extent of the Carrier element (Question 3). These two elements are intended to serve different user tasks (extent for selection, and pagination & foliation for identification). The task force was advised to have Extent of the Carrier reflect the actual extent of the resource as the main instruction rather than being based on the last numbered page (etc.) with an Alternative to record the actual extent. Additionally, it would be useful to be able to record which method was used in recording the Extent of the Carrier, especially since differences in recorded extent in bibliographic records in OCLC based on different methods may contribute to the proliferation of duplicate records.
Regarding the use of the term “identical” in 3.4.1.6, Glennan highlighted the case of two scores being needed for performance, identical except that one has a title page, and advised the task force to be precise about what is meant by “identical.”
As to whether or not to distinguish between/among different types of duration (Question 13), it was generally felt that a distinction is needed between actual duration (like that of an AV resource) and projected performance time (like that stated on a score).
The task force will consult with Glennan about why the proposed changes to Chapter 3 in the 2014 CC:DA proposal on recording duration were not approved and will produce a revised proposal after ALA.
Proposals from TF to Investigate the Instructions for Recording Relationships in RDA (Nathan Putnam)
Revision to 3.1.4, Resources Consisting of More Than One Carrier Type
This proposal addresses the need for instructions in RDA on describing accompanying material. Some questioned the use of sub-instructions within 3.1.4 with the same captions as other elements in RDA (Carrier Type, Media Type, and Extent). The task force will work with Glennan’s basic suggestion to have 3.1.4 point to the existing elements with those captions (and not include sub-instructions). Reser wondered if deletion of 3.1.4 would be a viable option. The task force had considered that, and may decide to present two options in the revised proposal.
Additional instructions in Chapter 27 for Structured Descriptions of the “Contained in” and “Container of” Relationships
This proposal follows earlier documents from the task force, including the Midwinter document outlining draft instructions for recording structured descriptions of related manifestations for RDA Chapter 27, specifically the “container of” and “contained in” relationships. Several commenters on the CC:DA blog opposed the task force’s approach to the “container of (manifestation)” relationship as a means of recording contents notes. Consensus was not reached.
The JSC Technical Working Group is examining RDA’s four ways of recording relationships (identifiers, authorized access points, structured descriptions, and unstructured descriptions) and will have a document ready for the JSC meeting in November; this work may inform JSC discussion of the issue at hand.
Given the discussion of a contents note’s function as a note on a manifestation, Snyder made a suggestion for the task force to place an instruction in Chapter 2 that would accommodate making a note on a resource’s contents.
Some wondered if ALA should even submit a proposal, given the new JSC working group on aggregates. In a straw poll, a majority expressed a preference to submit a revision proposal as opposed to another discussion paper.
Proposal from RBMS: References to Descriptions (Matthew Haugen)
This proposal contains elements that are significant departures from RDA. RBMS will take more time to consider the comments received and may submit a revised version of the proposal this year.
Proposals from the JSC Representative (Kathy Glennan)
Revised versions of the three proposals generated by Glennan go forward to the JSC
this year. They are:
Create RDA 2.17.14, Note on Identifier for the Manifestation
Engaging with RDA: governance and strategy (Gordon Dunsire)
Dunsire delivered the same presentation that he gave at the RDA Forum. He reviewed the history of RDA, including its publication in English in 2010, its translations into other languages in recent years, the publication of RDA entities and elements in Linked Data format, the launch of the RDA Registry, and the recent CoP (Committee of Principles) review of the governance model.
There will be a transition to new structure from now to 2020, with the goal of ensuring wider international participation and better reflection of the communities that use RDA as well as developing a sustainable business model. The CoP is aiming for broader recognition and adoption of RDA in new markets such as the Linked Data community.
In the proposed structure, which is intended to be both flexible and efficient, the RDA Board (the new name for the CoP) will be at the top; under that, there will be the RDA Steering Committee (the new name for the JSC) and RDA Board Working Groups, with multiple groups under those two. The RDA Board will include the chair of the RDA Steering Committee (RSC) and other members that represent library associations and national institutions, plus an ALA Publishing representative (ex officio). The RSC will have 6 permanent members, based on UN regions, plus the chair, secretary, examples editor, chair of the RDA Board (ex officio), ALA Publishing representative (ex officio), technical team liaison, translations team liaison, and wider community engagement representative.
There will be two standing working groups (technical and translations); other working groups are reviewed yearly until tasks are finished (e.g., aggregates, archives, music, places, relationship designators, fictitious entities, RDA/ONIX framework, capitalization instructions).
In the next two years or so, the following standards will be in review: the consolidated FR model, which is tentatively named FRBR-LRM (FRBR Library Reference Model), ICP (International Cataloguing Principles), and ISBD (International Standard Bibliographic Description). Since RDA’s underlying models are undergoing change, RDA will also change.
Dunsire talked about RDA’s suitability for cultural data and Linked Data and encouraged engagement through working groups, discussion on RDA-L and RDA Vocabularies GitHub, and participation in Jane-athons.
During the question and answer period, it was emphasized that many details still need to be worked out, such as succession planning as the three JSC North American representatives complete their terms and prepare a new single North American representative. In response to a concern that representation based on UN regions is not in proportion with use of RDA, Dunsire said that during the transition period, the CoP will monitor Toolkit sales in various regions and that RDA adoption will inform representation. Dunsire asserted that committees become less effective if they grow too large; therefore, a leaner structure is desired.
Dunsire would like to see more frequent RDA updates and more flexibility in the RSC’s schedule. He would welcome input during the transition period, stating that the transition is an opportunity to improve the structure and workflow.
Report from ALA Publishing Services (Jamie Hennelly)
Hennelly reported that the RDA Toolkit has over 3000 active subscribers and that the 2015 revenue goals for the Toolkit will likely be met or slightly surpassed. The budget will be revised to include more accurate goals given last year’s change in the pricing model. Online RDA training, such as Sonia Archer-Capuzzo’s eCourse on music cataloging, has been a good source of revenue, and ALA would like to add more courses in the next few years. In addition to the Toolkit and the eBook version of RDA, units of the print version of RDA are selling; the 2015 print should be out by the end of summer. The planned RDA Essentials has completed editorial review by the JSC and will move into production, to be available early in 2016. Hennelly discussed various translations of RDA that are in the works and mentioned RBMS policy statements being included in a Toolkit update in the near future. The February 2015 release of the Toolkit had the MLA Best Practices integrated with the instructions; the April 2015 release contained revisions resulting from the JSC’s decisions on 2014 proposals. The goal is for all groups responsible for translations, policy statements, and best practices to have the yearly April RDA update reflected in their documentation in the August Toolkit update.
Report from the PCC Liaison (Lori Robare)
Robare summarized the activities of PCC’s Standing Committee on Automation, Standing Committee on Standards, and Standing Committee on Training, including the following highlights. The Standing Committee on Standards Added a Global Workflow for serials to the RDA Toolkit and generated Policy Statements from the notes sections of the BSR and CSR (April 2015 release of the Toolkit). The Standing Committee on Training is surveying available training resources in Linked Data as part of the PCC effort to advance community understanding of Linked Data.
Report of the MAC Liaison (John Myers)
Myers reported that MAC (MARC Advisory Committee) discussed three proposals, all of which passed, and one formal discussion paper, which will return as a proposal.
Additionally, MAC discussed an informal discussion paper (whose primary audience was PCC) by Steven Folsom of Cornell University calling for best practices for URIs in MARC. MAC expressed support and encouraged Folsom to continue dialogue with PCC, which may ultimately result in proposals to revise MARC.
See the report of MLA’s liaison to MAC for details on the proposals and discussion papers that were discussed, especially those related to music (new field 348 for Format of Notated Music; new values for 007 positions for digital sound recordings).
Report from TF on Relationship Designators in RDA Appendix K (Bob Maxwell)
The task force produced a substantial revision proposal to add terms to Appendix K to relate persons, families, and corporate bodies to one another. The terms for person-to-person relationships are gender-neutral (e.g., parent, child, spouse, etc.). In cases where a gender-neutral term does not exist in English, the construction is as follows: aunt/uncle; nephew/niece.
The proposal includes terms that would relate a variant name in an authority record to the authorized access point in the same authority record. For example, if a person undergoes a name change due to marriage, change in gender, or the assumption of a religious title, one could use a relationship designator with whatever name is chosen as the variant name (e.g., “name before gender change”).
The proposal also includes a pair of terms to relate two person entities to each other when an attributive relationship exists between them (“appropriated identity” and “appropriator of identity”).
Music catalogers often use the pair of reciprocal terms “member” and “corporate body” to make relationships in authority records between a musical group and its members. The task force proposes using “member of” instead of “corporate body” (or “family,” as the case may be).
Deferred issues include relationship designators for jurisdictions; cross-appendix reciprocals; generalization of real identity/alternate identity beyond just person-to-person relationships; and fictitious characters. There is a JSC working group looking at issues around fictitious characters. The protagonist relationship described in the task force’s document (between a work and the principal character of the work) is more appropriate for Appendix I and will be handled as a fast-track proposal.
The proposal will go forward because there is a strong need for the terms proposed, but it is possible that the JSC will decide to refer this work to the JSC Working Group on Relationship Designators.
Proposal from OLAC on Chapter 3 elements for optical discs (Kelley McGrath)
OLAC prepared a revision proposal addressing characteristics (physical standard, recording method, and data type) of optical discs (e.g., CDs, DVDs, etc.). Recording whether a disc is a burned disc or a stamped disc (which is what OLAC calls the recording method) would be useful in assisting public services staff with troubleshooting in playback of discs. OLAC proposes adding the terms “burned disc” and “stamped disc,” along with a number of other terms pertaining to physical standard and data type, to RDA as controlled lists because there is not a suitable external vocabulary to link out to.
Additionally, the JSC has in the past declined referring to external terms for musical medium of performance and is likely to recommend using application profiles rather than incorporate references to specific external vocabularies in the text of RDA.
The meetings also included discussions of features of the CC:DA website, ideas for improving the microphone situation at the live meetings, and the need for broader CC:DA participation in commenting on RDA revision proposals. Proposals should now include an abstract to assist commenters. Robert Rendall completed his term as CC:DA chair and passed the mantle to Dominique Bourassa of Yale University.