ALA Annual, Orlando, 2004

 

 

THURSDAY–-June 24

 

1:30-5:30        Rosen Centre Hotel  -- Ballroom E

                        Back to the Future (FRBR)  -- 

The Cataloging and Classification Section's Committee on

Cataloging: Description & Access and MARBI present Back to the Future:

Understanding the Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records Model

(FRBR) and its Impact on Users, OPACS, and Knowledge Organization.

 

This one and a half day pre-conference was designed to demonstrate how FRBR will

influence the future development of information standards within the

library community, and acquaint technical services and IT professionals

with the implications of the FRBR model for cataloging rules, MARC formats

and other emerging standards for electronic technologies.

 

Topics and Speakers :

The FRBR Model--Allyson Carlyle, University of Washington

FRBR Basics--Barbara Tillett, Library of Congress

Why FRBR?--Glenn Patton, OCLC

The FRBR Future--Tom Delsey, Independent Consultant

FRBR and the Fiction Finder Project--Diane Visine-Goetz, OCLC

FRBR Applications in an LMS/OPAC--Vinod Chachra, VTLS

FRBR and MARC--Sally McCallum, Library of Congress

How FRBR Will Affect Library Users and Staff--Jennifer Bowen, University

of Rochester

FRBR and Library Services--Olivia Madison, Iowa State University

 

Barbara Tillett

  • FRBR is a conceptual model; it is not a scheme or implementation method
  • In Aug 2003 LC started looking at continuing resources, expressions, and applications
  • To add in user tasks, there is a need to broaden the discussion to include rights management, digitization projects, archives, digital preservation, etc.
  • Need to communicate with many different communities.
  • A work can contain other works or be about other works
  • GMDs for modes of expression are being discussed by JSC
  • Relationships are a part of FRBR, e.g. "is embodied in" - a quality of the original can be carried down through various expressions
  • The manifestations have sibling relationships
  • Content has relationships: equivalent, derivative, abstracts, abridgement, arrangement, etc.
  • Parts can have relations - companion, independent, dependent
  • Works can have sequential relationships
  • They can have accompanying relationships
  • Attributes = metadata
  • Using authority work, the elements inherent to all expressions could be in an authority record
  • FRBR fits Cutter's objects of finding, collocating - controlled vocabulary for precision searching
  • We can collocate by different elements: work (title), expression by format (e.g. CD, book, digital), by contributors, main characters, etc.
  • Interoperability is needed to accomplish goals of collaboration with multiple entities (ISO, Dublin Core, W3C) and collaboration in multiple environments
  • Next step needed is a data model - IFLA has a working group to do this
  • There are plans to redo chapter 12 for serials with FRBR by 2007

 

Allyson Carlyle

See http://www.ischool.washington.edu/acarlyle/FRBR2004Carlyle_files/frame.htm (until Sept. 15) [saved at home]

 

  • Entity relationship (ER) models were created to improve design of systems
  • ER highlight specific limited aspects of what they are modeling
  • ERs are those aspects that may change from one purpose to another - the purpose is important
  • Relationships can only happen between entities
  • A publisher can be an entity and an attribute (publisher - sells [relation] - item; nnn is publisher [attribute] of xxx book)
  • A model describes and relates abstractions (works, authors, subjects); abstractions are often sought by users in the OPAC
  • The term "work" grew out of Pettee's "literary unit"; then it was used by Lubetsky in the 1961 Paris Principles - it now ends up as a uniform title
  • Smiraglia says: "text" has intellectual abstract (thoughts) AND physical (printed on paper)
  • What is really new about FRBR is defining the entities and relationships for cataloging and meeting user tasks
  • One can end up with different interpretations of FRBR (some more appropriate than others) - is it an abstraction or physical? - when you catalog, you have the item - do you KNOW your item is typical of all other copies?  You just assume it is
  • FRBR is not always appropriate - it not, don't worry about it
  • When you are holding an item, you are holding the item, the manifestation, the expression of the work
  • Main entry -> main entry citation -- this is critical but this means author AND title to comprise the citation, so not Harken, Shelby E, but Harken, Shelby E. ODIN manual - but this is two attributes of the work entity
  • Expression attributes are something users are often looking for, so you the cataloger is to highlight things you think are important for your users (and that is subjective) and something ILSs may or may not be able to deal with - they will probably deal with the manifestation
  • FRBR is a model - it gives you a place to hang things when you think they are important, rather than prescriptive saying you must always include every FRBR possibility
  • Context adds other attributes - e.g. provenance, 545, 540, etc.
  • Principles: http://www.dab.de/news/pdf/statement_draft.pdf

 

Glenn Patton

  • We have a number of objectives in creating bibliographic records - comprehensive, currency, economy, … but nothing said why we did anything with users in mind
  • A goal - better collocation and navigation: FRBR in applications should allow a cataloger to be specific about individual versions whereas a user who doesn't know they need those specifics will be presented with something easy to use
  • We do relationships now: formerly/continued by, succeeding editions, authority records with name changes, etc. but ILSs haven't done anything well with it; we also put information in notes - performers, awards, etc.
  • Even though only 20% of titles in OCLC have multiple records, for the most part, those are the titles held by many libraries
  • OCLC may try to get FirstSearch up and running with some FRBR-ization and will be looking for reactions

 

Tom Delsey

  • FRBR is a model of how users perceive the bibliographic universe. They don't really see the "universe", only a piece. How then should the universe be presented in the OPAC? - that is what the model is trying to do. The catalog itself is a model
  • The model serves as a frame for how we look at the bibliographic universe -- what is the perspective, the perception, the focus?
  • We need to assist the cataloger by improving the rules
  • The problem: we get caught up in focusing on the individual data items - e.g. ISBN. We get caught in focusing on the form of the catalog
  • Focus: 1) we need to focus on the user; 2) we need to focus on what does the data represent; 3) we need to focus on the function of the data elements, not on just their existence or where they fit in the form
  • Re-define, re-conceptualize, re-engineer: 1) function of the catalog; 2) core record - data set; 3) concepts - class of materials, etc. that sit behind our forms and rules; 4) types of records (bib, authority); 5) syndetic structure

Function

a) Cutter: find (search author, title, subject), collocate (what the library has), assist in choosing (select)

b) Paris Principles: includes nothing about description, only access points

c) FRBR: find, identify, select, obtain. Identify should apply to all - work, expression, manifestation whereas obtain applies only to manifestation and item

Data set/core record

a) ISBD mandatory elements

b) AACR 1,2,3, levels of description but with little instruction

c) find, identify, select, obtain -> the work, expression, manifestation, so: 1) to find a manifestation, you need a title, parallel title, etc.; 2) to find all manifestations it needs to reflect relationships to other works, concepts (subject); 3) to identify, we need form, language, more descriptors on bibs like edition, publisher, etc.; 4) to select, we need form, relationships like formerly and continued by, physical medium; 5) obtain - source for acquisitions, license rights

Class of materials

a) class: book, map, music, sound record, electronic resource, graphic, etc.

b) type of publication: finite or continuing

c) problem: type of material in 008 isn't the same as AACR

d) then 007 - give a category of material that also doesn't match AACR, e.g. tactile material, notated music

e) FRBR - we need to realign class of materials and look at content and carrier

 

CONTENT

CARRIER

WORK -- EXPRESSION

MANIFESTATION

Category of work: literary, musical graphic

Type of medium: print, graphic, 3-dimensional

Mode of expression: notation, sound, fixed image

Status: published or unpublished

 

Access: remote or direct

 

Issuance: simultaneous or successive

 

Termination: predetermined or undetermined

 

Record type

Now

AUTHORITY

BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD

HOLDINGS

Control access points in bibs and give cross references

Bib contains: author, title, description, subjects, added entries

Local call number, copy, etc.

Right now we view these as adjunct to the bib

 

 

 

 

FRBR

 

AUTHORITY

BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD

HOLDINGS

English (language) expression of the work Illiad by person Home

Manifestation - only the attributes for THIS manifestation are needed

Item with call number and copy info

Person is Homer

Title on this particular publication

 

Work is Illiad

Publisher name

 

Expression is Illiad

Illustrator

 

Person is translator

 

 

Concept/event is Trojan War

 

 

 

Syndetic structure

We should be making full use of both bib and authority records

Bibs: main and added entries, notes, editors, sponsoring bodies, variant titles, series, analytics, relations (alternate form, continued by, related editions, etc); unless you use relator codes whenever you can, the user has no idea why you put all that data and names on the record - we don't usually tell the user why we put what we did on the record

Authorities: see refs - variant names, variant titles; see also - related persons and corporate bodies; related subjects

 

You should be able to move up and down FRBR relationships

Work <- -> Expression <- -> Manifestation

  

            Person authority

Person or corporate name           Work

            Corporate authority                    Expression

                                                                        Manifestation

 

Sally McCallum

  • MARC tends to address attributes of entities
  • LC commissioned a study by Tom Delsey of MARC/FRBR relationships. It classifies every MARC element as a FRBR element, indicates FRBR attributes and relationships, and extends FRBR to accommodate MARC needs
  • LC wanted to be able to apply FRBR to actual MARC21
  • LC sees FRBR as a guide to development of MARC21 and cataloging rules
  • The study showed 68% of the MARC record is bib content, 32% is for record processing; 5/6 matched FRBR and 1/6 required model extensions
  • Extensions to FRBR (examples)
    • Work: purpose of work - 502; level of interest - 521
    • Expression: symbology, tactile - 007 technical drawing scale - 507
    • Manifestation: place of manufacture - 260 $g; sound characteristics - 007 video; access instruction - 856
    • Item: location of item - 852, 850; date of acquisitions - 541
    • Person entity:  biog/hist 545
    • Corporate body entity: 535, 544
    • Event: type of event - 003
    • Additional entities: Work, contract - 536; item: action - 583
  • Record processing:
    • Record status
    • Segment - $8
    • Field - field tag, length of, subfield
    • Data element - type of element, source of data, non-sorting
  • Entity or attribute?
    • 008 - microform -- large print -- regular print reproduction
    • FRBR - form of carrier -- type size -- relationship
  • Some things just don't match well, e.g. $g miscellaneous information, 65X indicator 1 - where does it fit?
  • Experimentation tool is on LC page - http://www.loc.gov/MARC
  • Sally gave examples of how many expressions for a work might look - looked eerily like pre-56 NUC voluminous authors
  • Issues in trying to manipulate data: inconsistent use of uniform titles, typos, changes in cataloging rules
  • A MARC record is a unit dependent on the exchange environment. You don't exchange pieces of it

 

Vinod Chakra and John Esply - VTLS

  • Had to make choices in trying to design a FRBR catalog
  1. Store FRBR records or do it virtually? Virtually I shard because a bib is accessed many times, collocation is easier if stored, validation is easier if stored, cataloging is easier stored separately
  2. Should every record be FRBR-ized? Single-occurrence titles don't get any benefit from FRBR-ization
  3. Tools: VTLS made buttons to make FRBR records, make linking between bib and FRBR bib, FRBR record has its own validation, can make a FRBR tree, can un-FRBR for data exchange, can do authority control for FRBR records, cat batch FRBR-ization of a catalog or group of bibs
  4. FRBR display: FRBR expandable tree structure; use icons\
  • FRBR reverse tree - music collections, bound-withs - should be able to navigate without a new search
  • Users want: record sensitive display, collocation, navigation, holds, multi-lingual access
  • Uses 001 and 004 similar to Aleph LKR records
  • For series, VTLS allows multiple links to expressions
  • VTLS can create a super work record to which all related works are linked

 

Jennifer Bowen

  • We usually catalog the manifestation.
  • It is hard to catalog at the expression level, but one can collocate at the expression level in the ILS
  • Need to be able to create authority records at the expression level for specific situations
  • "Uniform title" may become "constructed title"
  • Possible additions to current authority records could include: language, edition, mode of expression, date
  • Mulver - don't really need to smoosh records of multiple formats into one record, because the tree should pull them together

 

RedLightGreen

  • Focused on asking undergraduates what they thought. An RLG survey showed they want a simple bib display but do want Table of contents, reviews, and abstracts.
  • "title cluster" combines works and expressions
  • All automated
  • Their editions are roughly the same as manifestation

 

Diana Vizine-Goetz on FictionFinder

  • Provides end-user access to works of fiction
  • Uses an algorithm to retrieve appropriate bibs; they used a snapshot as of Jan 2004.
  • It is up-down, down-up
  • Creates work sets
  • Creates a "family or works" - sort of the same as VTLS "super record"
  • Can choose to display most common English title even if there are foreign editions
  • Took lots of records and smooshed information together to create 1 composite record display
  • Tried putting summary at work level but it didn't always work well
  • Moved subjects to work level - e.g. imaginary places, setting subjects, literary forms
  • Some of their special forms don’t really belong there but wanted it for the product
  • Added a link to authority file to define gsafd terms

 

 

FRIDAY--June 25

 

 

8:00-5:30        Rosen Centre Hotel  -- Ballroom E

                        Back to the Future (FRBR)  -- LEAVE EARLY !!!

 

 

4:30-5:30        Peabody Orlando  – Bayhill Suite V

SAC Subcommittee on Semantic Interoperability– meeting, be early

 

            Members present: Shelby E. Harken, Chair; Lois M. Chan, Anton J. (Tony) Olson, Ruth Bogan, Giles S. Martin, Shannon Hoffman, Bonnie Dede

            Guests: Marie Whited, Yale; John Maier, Institute of Fine Arts, NYU;  Bryan Baldus, Quality Books; Sherman Clarke, NYU; Pat Kuhr, H.W. Wilson

           

Shelby called the meeting to order. Shannon moved to approve the agenda, Ruth seconded. Motion passed. Giles moved to approve the minutes as distributed, Shannon seconded. Motion passed.

 

The schedule/timeline was discussed. Shelby asked if we should have various deadlines for each area of work or is January at Midwinter acceptable? Tony and Ruth thought January would be reasonable. Ruth asked for clarification of just what should be in the glossary; it could be huge. She asked how broad should it be? What are we trying to accomplish? Who is our audience? Shelby said the goal is to complete a report to SAC, and hopefully to be published in some way that people wishing to work on such a project involving semantic interoperability would have some guidelines to follow. The glossary should include terms mentioned in other parts of our report. Shannon suggested we should consider what about semantic interoperability may make a term different. Lois suggested we should focus on terms in our charge. Bonnie volunteered to help Ruth since Lynn just has no time right now. Bonnie suggested looking at the NISO thesaurus document. Pat Kuhr is on the NISO Revision Group reviewing Z39.19. Lois suggested looking at terms in the Subcommittee on Metadata and Subject Analysis report for terms.

 

Shelby asked that members use the listserv to discuss work so everyone can contribute.

 

Tony reported on the work they intend to do beginning in August with the list of projects. Giles and Ruth will be working with him and others are welcome. He suggested AAT and Mesh may not belong on the list. Some of the information is skimpy. Some projects are part of something else. Shelby said she had started the project description just to get something to look at. The format it is in really needs changing and it isn't necessarily correct. Tony et al. are welcome to edit it. Tony asked Lois if there would be additional projects she would list. She said the next step in her research is to look at interfacing design and user reaction. Her last paper had about 18 projects. They need to be reviewed because what they had intended to do is not always what they end up doing. Perhaps the project list could list projects in one of three stages: started, going well, finished.

 

Shelby will send out current documents as Word attachments on the listserv. Shelby will work on editing the bibliography. She has more articles to read but hasn't had time and probably won't until October. Shelby will check with Joe Tennis about what contributions he might make to the guidelines section of the report.

 

We want to ask ALCTS if publishing would be possible in LRTS - they get the right of first refusal. David Miller is working on getting the Reference Structures report published there. Shelby will try to put together a summary of the program for Technical Services Quarterly. Miriam Palm had asked for someone to report on our program for the ALCTS Newsletter and it appeared that someone had volunteered.

 

The next meeting will presumably be at the same time (Friday, 4:30), even though there have been no messages yet from ALCTS for scheduling.

 

Meeting adjourned.

 

Note: Shelby talked with Daniel Lovins later about doing some work on the guidelines portion of the report. She will try to get Daniel and Joe Tennis together via email.

 

Draft documents on the web, see: http://www.und.nodak.edu/dept/library/Departments/abc/subjhead.htm#SACSEM

 

7:30-9:30PM      Rosen Centre Hotel  --  Salon 21

OLAC Cataloging Policy Committee

 

            MARBI and CC:DA reports were given by John Attig. A relevant MARBI proposal is to enhance the 752 to expand country to country or larger region and add subunit of a city. CC:DA will be charged with work on AACR3. The revision will be in phases. Part 1 will be first, between Nov. and Mar.  CC:DA needs to hear from various communities. Part 2 will be access points but this part still needs a good conceptual design. The plan is to publish in 2007. John thinks we are unlikely to see much rule revision in the mean time. The new rules for Rare Books is planned for 2007 but will refer to AACR2

            Non-human access points - robots, puppets, animals, etc. in TV, movies, etc. What rules do you use? Where do you do authority work? The proposal has several options: personal names in name file, animals in name and imaginary in subject, or all in name file.

            It was decided the "expert panel" is a moot topic. The FAQ/Best practices project will take a lot of maintenance and how does it fit with Q & A? There was a brief discussion on physical description for remote electronic resources and source of title note.

 

 

7:30-9:30PM      Renaissance Orlando Resort  --  Crystal Ballroom A/B

E-resource management DG - Digital Library Federation Electronic Resource Management Initiative Project http://www.diglib.org/forums/Spring2004/robertson0404.htm ; etc.

 

 

SATURDAY--June 26

 

9:00-11:00      Rosen Centre  --  Salon 1

            OCLC  - workflow - bib-note, PromptCat, etc 

 

Cataloging services - see handout.

Bibliographic notification (bib note). You set up a profile for one of the 3 options. If there is a change to the record, we get the full record and can also receive a report. If we choose the option to put in save file, there is no charge for export in Connexion. We will be able to flag save file bibs and do one command. Can apply Constant Data, update, export. Can use with PromptCat. You could accept a minimum level bib with PromptCat and receive bib note of update. Cataloging Partners adds more customized cataloging and includes original cataloging with TechPro. To do PromptCat, we can say which account at the vendor we want processed. We complete one form for each vendor. Certain fields can be added to bibs. If there is no bib, you can get a data record. You get a file of bibs and a report of what is in your file. Labels can be included with processing. It can be set up with standing orders. You can set it up to receive an email when a file is ready - it is usually based on shipments. PromptCat is employed after you order - it is not used to create an order record.

Batchload - this can be used to upload a file of local bibs to OCLC to set holdings. If you did original cataloging but another record is input in the meantime, your holdings are set on that record. Can do this for LDRs - Bobby Botham at Mankato said he is doing this - ask him how it works for him.

Connexion - a personal name that is not qualified will never be a match. Can lock and replace to save controlled headings as long as all the headings were a full match. Otherwise all rules about lock and replace apply. Steps: call up a bib, control all - if perfect replace, if need to control single and it is a pure match - replace, do local edits, export/update. OCLC knows there are punctuation problems with partially controlled headings. LCCN displays without a hyphen; they will change searching for with or without hyphen.

Review files - use action menu to save automatically as a special status. You chose who you want to send the record to review to. Email that library. They have read only access and you edit while they read or they can just email you back. The reviewer's save file will have regular save menu at the top and below will be records for review.

Upcoming enhancements - will allow string search in keyword box. Will allow you click to export then get a file of all you did in the day in one file. Three months will be given for each upgrade. Connexion 1.2 will be late 2004 with authority file searching, NACO, local files, text strings (assign to a keystroke and it can be added wherever the cursor is). CatME and Passport will probably end at the same time.

Connexion import - OCLC needs to find an OCLC number in the 001 to upload. If it doesn't find it, it will create a workform to edit. To upload a record that has OCLC number in 035, Aleph will need to change it to 001.

Connexion Express is great for deleting. It has full keyword searching. Connexion client will allow offline work in ver. 1.2. You will also be able to save records at the point of acquisitions and set holdings late. Spellchecker won't be included til at least 1.3. 

 

9:30-12:30      Ritz Carlton Plaza  

                        MARBI

                                 

2004-6. Indicator to define new fields and suppress display labels copyright or legal deposit number. Approved with changes.

 

2004-5. Music incipits. Approved with changes to make it less centered on "RISM".

 

2004-7. Revision of 752 field to add indicators or define a new field of similar structure as a subject. Will come back at Midwinter.

 

2004-DP04. Discussion favored option 1 which would add a $y for 010 020 022, clarify definitions for #a, $y $z. Other control number fields should be considered too.

 

2004-8 approved.

 

Adam Schiff will become MARBI chair.

 

11:30-1:00       

ALCTS Electronic Resources IG -- Tracking electronic resources at the Library of Congress  

 

 

1:30-5:30        Embassy Suites - International Drive  – Regency Ballroom

SACSEM PROGRAM – be early

 

Report to be published in Technical Services Quarterly

 

<2:00-5:30>   Orlando County Convention Center  – 206 A/B

CC:DA – Liaison EMAILED MARY ABOUT CONFLICT

http://www.libraries.psu.edu/iasweb/personal/jca/ccda/

                                (see Monday meeting time)

 

8:00-11PM       Universal Studios – XXX

Scholarship Bash  

 

 

SUNDAY--June 27

 

7:00-9:00        Rosen Centre Hotel -- Ballroom D/E

                        OCLC breakfast  -- Cataloging

 

Product pricing will probably go up ca. 3%. 50,000 libraries in 84 countries use OCLC.

Some current research includes: OAI, FRBR algorithm, bookkmarklets, ISBN to match other eds of the work, FictionFinder.

Amazoogle effect - everyone seems happy with it so what needs to be done it get them to qualitative information.

New preservation center in Winnipeg

Will be integrating FirstSearch and ILL

WebJunction being used by 8000 libraries

QuestionPoint is being used by 3000 libraries

Goal for complete move to oracle - July/Oct 2005

WorldCat Pilot with Google now also includes MSN and Yahoo

Connexion: local editing - 1.2; spellcheck, NACO - 1.3

MeSH - not til 2005

Full unicode - 2005

PromptCat - is ISBN mismatch, vendor doesn't do label

ISBN 13-digit for now put in 024 indicator 3 for EAN

Can request specific trainer for SCCTP SAC Subject - maybe NDLA pre-conference - Linda Gabel would be good

 

 

9:30-12:30      Sheraton World Resort  -- Ontario

SAC  - General Meeting

 

             MARBI report was given (ANN/04). LC report (see handout) items included: job status - all vacancies will be filled from within and no new outside people; acquisitions and bibliographic services are merged; web cat desktop includes correlations enhanced with Dewey-LCSH; Unicode is delayed another year (Voyager not ready); LC will soon handle 13-digit ISBN; looking at adding biographical information and more call numbers in 035 for name autho records; religious law KB will be out later this year; LC is using Gary Strawn's software to fix subject headings.

            DDC report: 3 publications: Dewey Decimal Classification: Principles and Application (3rd ed), DD22 and DD22 Abridged; there is a proposal on how to classify graphic novels http://www.oclc.org/dewey/discussion/default.htm ; Editorial Policy Committee will put recent work on a web page - looks SACSEM related

            IFLA report: IFLA working on a Virtual Clearinghouse for Subject Access Tools; many subject thesauri are not available on the web, but they inted to develop a clearing house for subject access tools worldwide and use descriptions/attributes defined in a glosary -- "subject access tools" to include classification systems, subject heading systems, and thesauri.

            Music Library Association: MLA has a new standards group to develop proposals for standards; Music Decisions now available only online (for fee)

            Law report: a committee is looking at how to determine whether a subject heading is a legal term

            Discussion period: FAST - beta should be ready during the summer; geographic is really ready; creating records in MARC21 format; have 2 million records not including name/title or conference headings; FAST is upward compatible - any LCSH can be made into a FAST heading but can't necessarily put it back together; SAC will form a committee for comment

            Reference structures: David Miller and Tony Olson said they are working on a paper for LRTS for the whole 10 years worth of work; how the 5 major ILS systems address them; he felt the best way to get recommendations to vendors is through user groups - he did III and Tony will try with Voyager

 

10:00-12:00    Sheraton World Resort  -- Okeechebee 2

Conference 2000 Action Plan Forum - Bibliographic Control of Web Resources: A Library of Congress Action Plan - Sandy Roe reported at SAC Monday

 

 

2:00-5:30        Orange County Convention Center – 311 A/C

LITA/ALCTS Authority Control in the Online Environment -- Fast, Slow,and Z39.19: Emerging Trends in Subject Authority Control

 

VIAF - there are now technological capabilities to allow a linked system of independent files. Unicode will allow viewing records in original script. OAI protocols could be used to create a union authority file. In the Semantic Web, ontologies equal controlled vocabularies.

 

NISO Thesaurus Standard (report by Stephen Hearn). The standard is being revised because it is too focused on print lists. Things like synonym rings (similar to Marcia Bates' proposal), taxonomies, thesauri are being addressed. It can be used to expand search not just to the preferred form but allow navigation among linked/related/cross-reference terms - all within/amongst controlled thesauri/lists. Semantics is an issue. They are not addressing subdivision or classification systems, but are looking at relationships as is (broader, narrower, etc.) and keeping semantics in mind.

 

Arlene Taylor - what have we got to lose? The question: what proportion of records retrieved by a keyword has that keyword only  in the subject field and as a result bibliographic records would not be found? In one method of searching, 36% would not have been found by a searcher. In another dealing with large result sets - 47.2% first found - further work was done to eliminate misspellings etc and got down to 35.4%. It appears that multi-keyword searches actually increase the number of bibs not found. It appears that adding TOC reduces the number not found but precision is reduced.

 

Ed O'Neil & Lois M. Chain - FAST: developed to provide a new approach to subject access for digital resources, etc. Vocabulary should be simple, usable, optimal, semantic interoperable, compatible, easy to maintain. Advantages of using LCSH for FAST: rich vocabulary, defacto standard, has homograph and synonym control, extensive hierarchical relations, etc. The hierarchy is retained in facets - there are 8: topical, geography, form, chronological, person, corporate, conference/meeting, uniform titles. They decided to use MARC21 format but needed a chronological field. Chronology will only be created when given in a cross-refereces 150, 688 # of occurrences, 750 links to LCS. Decided to do geographics only in indirect order. First level geographic names will be limited to names from geographic area codes; other names will be entered as subdivisions under the smallest first level name within which it is fully contained. They are qualifying only when otherwise two would be exactly the same. E.g.

151 Alaska $z Rowan Bay (Bay)

670 GNIS whenever possible

751 Rowan Bay (Alaska : Bay) $2 DLC sh 00####

Genre headings are problematic because many lose meaning when separated from their topic. Person and corporate had to appear as a subject in the database (not replacing NACO). Chronological (period) consists of only a date or date range. Limited to a single chronological heading per record. Establish if in chronological cross-reference. Problem: topic and period joined, e.g. Civil War, 1861-1865 - decided to split into topical for the event and place/time for the dates. In LCSH many headings are established, but many more are synthesized by catalogers based on the Subject Manual. In FAST (except chrono) all headings are established. Many music headings are established - ended up with 50,000. Expansion of headings using patterns ends up with established headings that are not necessarily logical:

Burns and scalds

Burns and scalds - Patients (class of person)

Burns and scalds - Patients - Family relationships (back to topic again)

Future: resynchronize with LCSH, work on conference/meeting facet and uniform titles; expand headings with GNIS; expand geographic based on usage; revise and expand form (genre) facet

Fast is faceted, hierarchical, fully established, and compatible with LCSH

http://www.oclc.org/research/projects/fast/

 

John Attig - FRBR and authority records. Why does it appeal worldwide? Librarians and catalogers form a view of what needs to be done. System designers and vendors know it without knowing cataloging rules. It brings focus to the OPAC, not just the records.

How does it apply to subject authority control? Primary requirement: to create a structured framework for relating data in bib and authority records to users needs. FRBR is basic for bibs. FRAR clarify? identifiers or standard numbers. User tasks for bib: find, identify, select, obtain. User tasks for authority records: find identify conceptualize, justify (document decisions and usage for literary warrant). FRBR: work is realized in expression, expression is embodied in manifestation, manifestation is exemplified in item.

Subjectness: "work has as subject"

Work has: work, expression, manifestation, item

Work as: person, family, corporate body

Work subject: concept, object event, place

Here is where authority control comes in. Each entity is known by a name. Name is basis for access point. Access point is governed by rules. Access point is created/modified by agency.

Pre-coordinated subjects: each concept is independently related to a work

Post-coordinated subjects: concepts or facets are organized into a structured access point, which in turn is related to the work

New entities Tom Delsey added: form, function, objective, time, physical characteristics

For sharing authority records: need to know what they agree on in the rules, where they don't agree, and need to reduce disagreement

IFLA Meeting on Cataloging Experts discussed an international cataloging code. Sharing names is not too problematic, except US is only place with option that one person writing under different names have separate NACO records. Subject sharing: 1) subject terminology is language determined, b) subject thesauri are self-contained and operate as a whole

FRBR - new ways of thinking about bibliographic and authority control sharing globally.

http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/frbr-acig.pdf

 

 

7:00-9:00          Peabody Orlando -- Florida Ballroom I

PCC -- CONSER summit, ISSN, OpenURLS & DOIs in CONSER bibs - watch for summary of this meeting after ALA

(see below)

 

SACO program is newly established. NACO participants no longer need to do BFM on revised headings. New official names of the files: LC/NACO authority file and LC/SACO authority file. Taks Group on Research into User Needs - working on levels of record content as related to FRBR. There is a Task Group on Distribution of Integrating Resources. PPC training is cooperating with ALCTS. The PCC tactical plan will be developed this fall as a 3-year plan. CONSER - look for information on pub patterns - especially captions - there might be a list to use. CONSER is looking at where MARC21 Holdings Format can interface with ONIX. CONSER - a macro has been developed for CONSER members to quickly convert a print bib to an aggregated electronic journal bib.

Standards. ..conference on monographic/serial standards: working on making a major/minor list for ch. 12, sponsoring bodies that change, call numbers and classed together series. There is concern about the direction ISSN is going. Access-level record is in discussion.

CONSER summit: They discussed a number of ideas (see CONSER web page for Summit): title level print journal is still useful; lot of publishers are digitizing backfiles; most researchers don't care where they get data if the data is okay; interoperability among systems is needed - if it doesn't work users don't get the content

ISSN (Regina Reynolds): ISSN revision group has been meeting. ISO 3297 is up for 5-year review. Committee includes: CrossRef, Bowker, ISBN, major publishers, etc. There are 4 ways to address ISSN:: a) status quo - ISSN as a manifestation ID, b) change to title-level ID, c) use one base ISSN plus a suffix, d) hierarchical - title (top) with an ISSN and manifestations with "lower" ISSNs. None of these was acceptable as a concensus. Suffix for how many different formats? Too confusing to gell different between numbers; "D" was the most unpopular, "B" title level didn't address manifestation. Need: title-level, manifestation or product-level, and access to authoritative ISSN metadata. Three point approach: functional granularity, title-level, ISSN register - better access. Functional granularity: ex. 1) group of formats for 1 title content, ex. 2) 1 format of 1 title.  Ownership of ISSN: ISSN blocks could be given to major publishers; they would be required to supply metadata, publishers would be "independent" if assigsning it right, there would be fewer blocks of numbers they never use. Problem: what if they don't assign right at the level that works for us? Title-level ID is needed! It needs to be recognizable. Maybe a URN, DOI, ISTC, in a 024 in bibs and ISSN's records. Why a title-level ISSN?: need to link to content, need to use open URL, need collocation in catalogs, need to address all physical forms, editions, and languages. In essence the problem is FRBR-ish - work or expression = title-level. We need lookup ability of ISSN database - goal is to be done in 2006.

URLS (Valerie Bross) - linking matters !! Can we accommodate open URL's? Background developments and work: CONSER module 31, aggregator-neutral reocrd, CONSER Summit. Possible areas of work: a)  PURL - it is not OpenURL compliant (http://www.bibpurl.oclc.org), b) DOI - must be register with CrossRef (ex: embedded in URL: http://dx.doi.org/---/ISSN), c) OPEN URI.0 is a developing standard. Problem: bibs increasingly have many URLs, some taking you to same site. So, task force will continue to figure out how to determing "best", "right" URIs / URLs in bibs

 

MONDAY--June 28

 

 

8:00-12:30      Orlando County Convention Center – 206 A/B

                        CC:DA  -- Liaison

The first meeting included the report on JSC meeting, 19-22 April 2004 [CC:DA/JSC Rep/MLB/2004/1 (May 10, 2004) by Matthew Beacom (described above). Barbara Tillett addressed the work on done at the First IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloging Codes. The goal was to increase the ability to share cataloging information worldwide by promoting standards for the content of bibliographic and authority records used in library catalogs. The object is to examine cataloging codes currently in use in Europe to compare their similarities and differences and perhaps develop an International Cataloging Code. Some discussion focused on personal names, the concept of an "authorized heading" and inclusion of FRBR principles.  The draft Statement of International Cataloing Principles was presented. See http://www.ddb.de/news/ifla_conf_index.htm or http://www.loc.gov/imeicc2

 

The NISO report included information on a number of standards up for review: price indexes, holdings, OpenURL, and information system metrics. The 13-digit ISBN wasn't due to be used for several years but publishers are already using so both LC and OCLC have given statements of what to do in the meantime. The ISSN is undergoing scrutiny. Four scenarios have been discussed: 1 ISSN for each medium but not each format (e.g. 1 for electronic journal, but not one for PDF, one for HTML, etc.); title level - like a work ID; base number at title level, then add suffix for each format; or, master ISSN at the title level with secondary ISSNs for each format and medium. Three message formats for ONIX have been developed so far: a) online holdings (SOH), serial product and subscription (SBS), and serial release notification (SRN). The MetaSearch Initiative has 3 subcommittees for different components: BA for access managmetn, BB for collection description (Dublin Core), BC for search an retrieve.

 

Rule revisions discussed included Early Printed Monographs, corrections to rules identified while preparing Cartographic Materials: a manual of interpretation for AACR2, work from the Task Force on Consistency across Part I of AACR2, and the Task Force on SMDs. Despite all the work the Task Force has done, JSC has decided to work in a different direction. A report at the end of July will contain rules for area 5 and related notes in general chapters and special chapters. There will be supplemental chapters based on carriers to address extent and dimension. In these categories:; books, atlases, aggregated works bound (scores); book things - loose, not bound; photographs, flash cards, postcards, misc. graphic; slides, transparencies, projected single format; 3-dimensional; filmstrips, fiche, frames aggregated together on a container; disk cylinders (medium is integral part of container); reels, cartographic (medium in container); chips; no carrier. There will be a second set of supplemental chapters based on medium for other physical description: books, microforms; tactile; 3-D; projected, still, moving; sound; digital. All this is an effort to separate carrier and content. Discussion was held on how to handle e-discussion  amongst members and with non-committee experts.

 

CC:DA will sponsor a program for 2005, Cataloging Cultural Objects with the Visual Resources Association (VRA). They are working toward something like making their manual an AACR3-like set of rules for visual materials. This could be followed in 2006 by training. It is a "content" standard.

 

12:00-1:30        Rosen Centre Hotel –  Grand Ballroom

summer only            OCLC Luncheon    

           

Sat with NAL cataloger and compared notes on ILS

 

2:00-4:00        Orange County Convention Center -- 206 A/B

                        SAC -- General meeting

 

            LC Action report (Sandy Roe): reviewed Marcia Bates' report and work expected in next few months; Reeser presented the LC modes of cataloging report: 1) web guides, pathfineders are to assure guide or guides are represented by subjects in OPAC, 2) MODS records are up for Minerva and I hear America singing, 3) MARC/AACR2: a) access level record approach emphasizes content and subject access points, task based assessment research was contracted for with Tom Delsey, they want use statistics, and a way to check links on records; b) Greenberg's metadata generator project - a comparions study was done extracting words in text and harvesting metatags similar to dc.dot - results show catalogers create best subjects, researcher/creator next, and machine last

            Graphic novels discussion took place with input from two publishers

            Subject training - the content of the pre-conference will become a SCCTP training institute; if it works well LC/ALCTS may try other areas of cataloging; PCC will develop a web page for the course; training fees include buying the manual and paying for trainer travel

            SACSEM report - I gave

            SACO program - now more like NACO; current members are grandfathered in, i.e. NACO people are also default SACO members; new members must do 10-12 records/year, have institutional commitment, encourage LCSH/SACO training, use newly revised subject proposal form on SACO page; new FAQ says how to join; need good understanding of LC Subject Manual

 

2:00-4:00          XXX – XXX

ALCTS/SS Committee to Study Serials Cataloging - watch for reports

The Committee to Study Serials Cataloging,
Serials Section, ALCTS, has changed its name to Continue Resources
Cataloging Committee.