ALA Annual Chicago 2005

 

 

THURSDAY–-June 23

7:30AM -7:00  Registration 

 

7:00AM-5:00   Hyatt  - Grand BR C/D North - preconference breakfast, lunch, breaks

                        Basic creation of name and title authorities

 

Trainee manual will be used in training CFL staff and ND Funnel participants. 

 

 

FRIDAY--June 24

 

7:00AM-5:00   Hyatt  - Grand BR C/D North - preconference breakfast, lunch, breaks

                        Basic creation of name and title authorities

 

 

4:30-5:30 PM       Palmer  -- LaSalle 5

                   SAC Subcommittee on Semantic Interoperability meeting

 

Shelby called the meeting to order. There were no changes made to the agenda. Shannon moved the minutes be approved as emailed; Tony seconded. Motion passed. Shelby explained the Subcommittee is near the end of its work with some editing needed. The plan would be to: a) get all documents on the web page, and b) send each document out for comment with a deadline. Once all documents have been reviewed, they can be sent to SAC for comment. We should be ready for SAC in the next several months.

             Tony had proposed some changes to the Introduction/criteria document. These were discussed. The agreed-to changes will be made and posted to the web page in the next few weeks. We have seen some changes to the glossary since the last meeting, but nothing major. Lois made some notes for Ruth to review. The list of projects was discussed. We can't find current information on VILIB although it must have existed at the time it was put on the list. We will try one more time to find information on it. If nothing is found, it will be removed. Hittite and Hasset are monolingual and will be removed.

            Bonnie and Shannon reviewed the guidelines and made some suggestions. Shelby will sent their document to Daniel to revise. When Daniel has made is revisions, Shelby will put the document on the web page. The review of seven individual projects was completed but the formating of the document for responses to the questions isn't working well. Daniel will need to change it to something easier to use. Then that will be transferred to the project reviews to record the answers.

            It is expected work can be completed via email/listserv and there should be no need for a meeting at Midwinter.

            Meeting adjourned.       

           

 

7:30P-10:00      Hilton  -- Lake Huron

OLAC Cataloging Policy Committee (CAPC)

 

7:30-9:00PM   Palmer  -- Montrose 1

FAST Subcommittee

 

Talked with Eric Childress and Shannon Hoffmann - we will be put in contact with Susan Westberg of OCLC to test: a) side bar in Office2003 for the FAST file and b) ability to add to records in ContentDM

 

Ed O'Neill reported OCLC has been doing cleanup rather than "new" stuff. They are looking algorithms to make them more effective. They will be moving ahead with the remaining facets. See handout.

 

Arlene did some work with library science students. OCLC make a database of library science topics for them to work with. Generally over half of them got the same results. Shannon (BYU) tried using FAST in their projects. They verified realy headings in LCSH and then input into the terminology list in ContentDM. They would like FAST in ContentDM:  a) trying to get to the point that person with digital images could preview words that match the image before the library starts working on the metadata; b) their standard is LCSH and when it isn't there they submit to NACO/SACO which would eventually come back in FAST

 

Some issues discussed: Translations vs. translated into; $x after a topic heading should stay with it, but disappears after all other type of headings and becomes a separate heading - works well much of the time, but not always; geographics are geographic, form are form - FAST does not mix types; geographics follow GAC structure - in some cases the result is uneven; geographics serve to describe location, topic, and to disambiguate, but this is not always achieved when separated from their topics.

 

Test: Pittaccess/pittaccess to search headings the students used; try cataloging using FAST

 

SATURDAY--June 25

 

8:30-12:00      McCormick Place  -- S405

CC:DA program -- Cataloging cultural objects (10AM is real discussion) - http://www.vraweb.org/CCOweb/

 

See handout.

Elisa Lanzi. Artistic creations/works is the focus of the new CCO standard but it also applies to photos, archival documents, built works, images, installations, clothing, archeological materials, manuscripts, performance. The goal is to promote descriptive practe standards and share documentation: data structure, data values, data content, international content standards, metadata structures.

 

CCO follow VRA core; uses AAT, ULAN, TGN. It provides guidance on how to populate data fields based on VRA core and CDWA. It will map to Dublin Core and MARC21. It provides guidelines for selecting, ordering, and formating data and syntax. It is intended to compliment AACR and DACS (the new APPM). It brings authority control to the VRA group. Publication expected spring 2006.

CDWA = Categories for the Description of Works of Art

 

http://www.vraweb.org/CCOweb/ will have examples, training materials, but the actual standard will need to be purchased from ALA. They are cataloging real and virtual objects and model relationships. They use multiple toolsets - content standards, subject thesauri, etc. XML schema at Getty has been set up for OAI harvesting metadata. 

 

Ann Whiteside. There are 17 categories (similar to Dublin Core) in VRA 3.0 and 3.1 in CDWA - CCO grew out of both. It is intended to be used to catalog single objects.

AUTHORITY RECORDS

 

 

Person/corporate

 

Image record

Geographic

Work record

 

Concept

 

 

Subject aboutness

 

Source record

Subject isness

 

 

 

"Class" is terms from an authority file. "Notes" are general descriptions and physical descriptions.

There are 10 top principles listed on website

Libraries are crosswalking their metadata to MACR21 for the local OPACs.

 

Maria Oldal. She feels MARC works well to put CCO into. She has done it for nearly everything successfully.

Note: can ContentDM accommodate CCO? Can I crosswalk? Could we create a separate base in Aleph and use a separate edit_doc_999 to accommodate display and not activate authority control?

 

Object description

Object naming:  Workk type: ojbect. MARC mapping: 245h, 300a, 655a, 246 allows variant names or 247 former names - they capitalize titles in 245

Authority control: makes sense in CCO except for 245 titles - they are too fluid and locally created. "Main" entry is not used - just all creators and their role; information can come from any valid source. Anonymous (or similar work) is prescribed - e.g. Anonymous $c Nederlandische $d 16th century $e artist

Stylistic and chronological information: concept of school, style creator's place or culture (rather than the object's place of creation - often too hard to determine)

Subjects: use from authorized sources but not in strings and they use both plural (for multiple objects) and singular (for a single object) forms.

See: http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/intrometadata/

 

Jonathan Furner. Subject access.

Subject access is 3-fold: description, identification, interpretation. First they write the description. Next they created the 3 types of subject headings as keywords but from authorized sources.

Example: flowers in a vase

subject description: still life, flowers, peonies, primrose, tulips, roses, wine, ledge

subject interpretation: senses, smell, beauty, life, Passion of Christ (scholars say that is what the painting portrays)

Example: Civil War picture of Lincoln by a tent with Col. Pinkerton and Major John…

subject description: portraits, army, officer, president, tent, camp site

subject identification: NACO form of name for each person, Civil War, Battle at Antietam, [in LCSH authorized form]

"Class" can be assigned from Dewey Decimal Classification because the number and its caption are semantically always the same


Challenges: What does "subject" mean? What kinds of property of works should be indexed? What is used to determine "subject"? Need to select and do authority control and identify the metadata elements.

 

1. Subjects: e.g. people, things, events, places, concepts

- objects (works) - e.g. art works, buildings, documents, collections. A) descriptive cataloging: what objects are; b) subject cataloging: what objects are of / about

- images - e.g. photos, slides, digital files. a) descriptive cataloging: what images are: what images are of; b) subject: what images are about.

- texts - e.g. books. Descriptive: are and subject: about

- representatal (figurative) - e.g. narrative stories, episodes, non-narrative: people, animals, activities, places

- non-representational - e.g. abstract works, buildings, furniture, decorative arts. Subject: content, meaning, form/composition, function, purpose, use

Results in ofness and aboutness: generically of is "descriptive" and specifically of is "identification" and about is "interpretation"

Example

Descripptive: nude woman holding a dagger

Identification: suicide of Lucretia

Interpretation: virtuousness

2. Determine subject analysis

Offness - who what when; work from generic to specific

Aboutness - meaning, what is expressed by the work, intention of the creator, interpretation by scholars, historical what does it symbolize?

3. Term selection - what kinds? How many? Depends on: resources you have, needs of users, importance of work, unusual details, capabilities of system (e.g. ability to link to broader/narrower terms)

Note: it is better to be right about generalness than to be wrong about specifics

4. Authority control

Use preferred names of real people and real places

Use preferred names of genre terms (from various thesauri)

Use preferred forms of generic subject terms (")

Use resources such as AAT, Inconclass http://www.incolass.nl, etc.; also see CCO for list of sources for terms

Link you 6XXs within your ILS

5. Metadata element sets - subject metadata elements in CCO

a) description - 1/record, free text

b) subjects - required, controlled, repeatable

c) extent - designating what part of object the subject applies to

d) subject type (descriptive, identification, interpretation)

"iconographical research into aboutness" - something that needs to be done to determine subjects - history of the object. Can try AMICO database (digital images) and use the notes there for subject interpretation

 

Challenge: in-progress works. E.g. a performance with different actors over time, an installation as it grows over time

 

9:30-12:30      Hyatt  -- Grand Ballroom F

MARBI -- http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/   

 

Proposal No. 2005-04R: Hierarchical Geographic Names in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format

Summary: This paper proposes expanding the definition of Field 752 (Added Entry — Hierarchical Place Name), adding new subfields to 752 and the newly defined 662 and making some current subfields repeatable to enable a hierarchical approach to subject-oriented geographic coverage.

MARBI action taken: Approved with significant editorial changes. Discussed shifting subfields to allow for $e being relator.

 

Proposal No. 2005-07: Revision of subfield $b in field 041 in the MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data

Summary: This paper proposes changing the coding convention of field 041 (Language code) subfield $b (Language code of summary or abstract/overprinted title or subtitle) for audiovisual materials by removing the phrase “when they [the languages of subtitles] differ from the language of the soundtrack.” It also proposes changing the terminology used for subtitles and clarifies that captions are also covered in the definition of subfield $b.

MARBI action taken: Approved with minor changes

 

Proposal No. 2005-08: Changes to accommodate IAML coded data in bibliographic fields 008/18-19, 047 and 048

Summary: This proposal discusses the changes needed to incorporate IAML form and genre, and medium of performance codes in MARC 21.

MARBI action taken: Broke variable fields out. They want to restrict these to 3-letter codes. 047 to come back.

 

Proposal No. 2005-06: Addition of Subfields for Relator Terms/Codes for Subject Access to Images

Summary: This paper proposes defining subfield $e in fields 630 and 651 and subfield $4 in fields 630, 650, and 651 in order to use relator codes and terms to enhance the retrieval of visual materials.

MARBI action taken: Need to find a new subfield for 611 and 711 $e. Need to defined $e for 654 and 662.

 

Voted to approve resolution: Equal access to nonroman resources - i.e. utlization of Unicode. Unicode has 4 possible implementations and the expectation is that the ALA membership will be asked to vote on it to encourage use of Unicode by all system vendors.

 

Discussed FRBR. There is a need for identifiers for work and expressions and how would we do authority records. Sally McCallum prepared a document proffering two options. Should 6XX's be included and what is the impact of needing to keep them updated?

 

2:00-5:30        Hyatt  Grand Ballroom A

CC:DA – Liaison

 

ALA representative, Jennifer Bowen. Resources Description and Access (RDA) should take a more progressive approach. We need to involve other communities/stake holders.

Timeline:

May-July 2005: Development of prospectus

Oct 2005-April 2006: Completion of draft of part I, and constitutency review

May-Sept. 2006: Completion of draft of part II, and constitutency review

Oct 2006-April 2007: Complete of draft of part III, and constituency review

May-Sept 2007: Completion of general introduction, appendix, and glossary

2008: publication

See: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/0410out.html

- Feedback on part I included comments on both past AACR2 and future "AACR3". The new outline is not what CC:DA had discussed so CC:DA commented at ALA and was generally favorable: purpose and scope at the beginning, relation to the resources descriptions, and chapter 1 with terminology and where to start when cataloging. 

- PCC in its stratetic planning is thinking the catalog will be discovered from various sources and the ILS client will be more for library staff managing data and making sure a larger federated searching model will easily harvest data we have in traditional OPAC records.

- RDA is intended to focus on content - not how our OPAC displays data, i.e. not a display standard.

- FRBR has been worked into the new outline

- RDA should allow a cataloger to catalog something htat will be compatible with ISBD, although arrangement is not exactly in ISBD order, e.g. all rules about the "title" might be together, but the resulting elements be show up in different places with ISBC.

- IFLA is reviewing both FRBR and ISBD so they are in flux

- Prefered source of information is an important issue - chief source and/or prescribed source - LC's response was discussed

 

NISO report. 5 standards, 1 ISO, and 1 registration were all acted upon since the last meeting.

- ISSN is being revised - they have reached a concensus (TISSN): there will be medium version (e.g. online, microfilm, print) while retaining ability to keep the original/super ISSN

- Functional Requirements of Authority Records (FRAR) is in final draft and will be reviewed in the next few months.

 

 

SUNDAY--June 26

 

7:00-9:00        Hilton -- Grand Ballroom - registered

                        OCLC breakfast   

 

OCLC will be using WIKIs for review, reader advisory service, &information able to be added for books in WorldCat. WorldCat is growing rapidly: 58 million bibs in March, 59 in April, 60 in May.

 

New platform able to use multiple sources

            MARC  Dublin Core   IFLA   LDAP  EAD   

SOAP  XMP  OAM-PMH  SR

                                                                   Full-   

Text

New contributors

                                          Links

                                                                   Uni- 

code

                                               Graphics   sound           

motion

 

- Netlibrary has 91,000 titles. They also have digital audiobooks.

- Will add AskJeeves to Google and Yahoo toolbars.

- Terminology services pilot - 18 libraries are testing. Uses CONNEXION browser, Microsoft Office 2003 research pane, and thesauri.

- E-journals holdings pilot - setting e-journals holdings automatically; partners include Ex Libris

 

I tried to find out information about PromptCat. Buser says they will have a new form soon. She said my profile is still there but needs revising. I will need to figure out fields in Aleph. She has names of Aleph users. A librarian using Baker and Taylor says is works great. She does everything but labels. BNA is very experienced and can include barcode and order number in 949 or whatever field depending on Aleph.

 

 

9:30-12:30      Palmer  -- PDR 16

SAC  - General Meeting

 

See handouts.

 

Sears will soon be available in MARC21. Will we want in ODIN? Will be able to save records in UTF-8 (Unicode) and bring into Aleph.

 

LC report. See handout. Web access to series - p.4; Automated web cataloging - p.4; CIP - Cornell doing ECIP - p.5; three modes/levels for digital materials: 1) AACR2, 2) MODS, 3) Webguides - p.6 #D; PCC page redesigned; NACO liaisons - p.8; change in headings for parks - p.9; Indians and tribes - corporate names for nations using names of tribes found at Bureau of Indian Affairs website - p. 9. There is a proprosal to allow adding dates to personal names - respond by July 22. [ I did]

 

MLA's 75th anniversay convention will be in Memphis Feb. 2006. Focus will be form/genre for music and music information retrieval.

 

AALL's report focused on what is and isn't inherently legal and effect of incorrect subfielding in OPACS.


Discussed new schedule format. Bruce will ask for: Sun. 10:30-12:00 and Mon. 1:30-3:30 and 4:30-5:30

 

_#_#_#_#_#_#

 

I stopped by the OCLC booth to ask for a demo of the Terminology Project but only one person had heard of it and couldn't demo it.

 

1:30-4:30        McCormick Place - S405

ALCTS/LITA Authority Control in the Online Environment IG -- "XML and Authority Control" (see below)  


See handout  

 

Program Description ACIG http://www.library.yale.edu/cataloging/authorities/acig2005program.html
Information traditionally stored in MARC authority records in library catalogs is increasingly being used in interesting ways in XML environments. This program will look at standards that have emerged to facilitate the XML uses of authority data, projects that have begun to implement these standards, experimental research being conducted in the field, and general issues surrounding the use of controlled vocabularies in metadata descriptions.

Speakers:
1. "MADS (Metadata Authority Description Schema), a MODS Companion" Sally H. McCallum, Chief, Network Development and MARC Standards Office, Library of Congress

- In XML "formats" become schemas which specify the tags, attributes, etc. Newer protocols like OAI harvesting and SRU/SRW prefer XML. METS packages metadata (prefers XML) including rights data and all other stuff. Most XML applications convert to another XML application. MARC21 -> MARCXML -> MODS -> Dublin Core -> MADS; once something is in MARCXML it can go back and forth. MODS is less detailed than MARC21 but highly compatible and has rich linking capability. MADS pub ver. 1 Apr 2005: highly coordinated with MODS - the schema specifies high level elements with unique substructure with much of it really points at MODS or links to authority records. Heading elements in authorities include: name, title, topic, temporal, genre, geographic, hierarchical geographic, occupation. Attributes indicate related types: earlier, later, parent organization, broader, narrower, equivalent, other. Other attributes indicate variant types, e.g. expansion. There are other elements: notes, affiliation, fieldOfActivity, URL, identifier, extension, recordInfo, etc. http://mods.loc.gov


2. "XML for Authorities at NLM: the Groundwork for an Integrated Authority File"  Diane Boehr, Head of Cataloging, National Library of Medicine

see handout


3. "XML Name Access Control Repository at the Hong Kong University of Science & Technology Library" Louisa Kwok, Head of Cataloging, HKUST Library
HKUST - XML for Chinese/English database. They feel name access control is better than authority control. In Chinese, a person can have multiple names and multiple characterizations/scripts of the name. They can retrieve names from OCLC and modify the record to have the English form in the 100 and 700s with other variants.

http://alcme.oclc.org/eprintsUK/services

 

4. "Organic Authorities: XOBIS and the Metamorphosis of Library Data" Kevin S. Clarke, Digital Projects Programmer, Firestone Library, Princeton University
see handout

 

5. "Web Service Experiments with Authority Control" Thomas B. Hickey, Chief Scientist, OCLC
Need persistent URLs. They tried using DSPACE - linked with "control" button and it brings up name from authority record. It is free, simple, can construct a link to a full authority. Example: http://errol.oclc.org/laf/n82-####.marcxml It needs to be moved to a standard protocol SRW/SRU, would be better linked to LC, ranking is needed for multiple hits and an ability to check frequency. The basic service needs to be free.

 

Completeness - NACO doesn't have all names and it's not easy to get them there from non-NACO entities, eg. Museums. Experiment: could ProQuest these map to OCLC? If all went through NACO work they could be compared and cleaned up.

 

VIAF - trying mapping; need to use the bib record information to help identify different authors with the same name. VIAF would connect separate authority files. Looking at OAI-PMH harvess but need stable URI or SRW/U for names, other text in records, control numbers. RDF is designed to support this mapping.

 

ONESAC is using RDF/OWL - OPAC network shared authority control. RDF imports MARC in RDFXML. http://errol.oclc.org/laf/n8254463.html

http://www.portia.dk

 

6. "Hong Kong Chinese Authority (Name) Project: the HKCAN XML Version" Joanna Yi-hang Pong, Cataloguing Librarian, Run Run Shaw Library, City University of Hong Kong

see handout

 

4:30-6:00          Embassy Suites -  Salon A-C

OCLC PromptCat Users Group

Robin Buser - new developments at OCLC with potential impact for PromptCat users  followed by Arlene Klair (University of Maryland) - how they use PromptCat in conjunction with Bibliographic Record Notification. - REGISTERED

 

There will be new forms in the next few monoths. The Cataloging Partnership Program is for outsourcing difficult formats, can even get NAXOS. PromptCat can be used for all formats except serials. The library orders and is billed through OCLC (i.e. MTX). Most libraries have a 97.4 match rate and have their materials shelf-ready. Bib note (bibliographic notification) send a file and report daily for minimum to full level bib, TOC, and new/revised URL - this would even work for the GPO records being updated per our profile.

 

See Maryland (USMAI) handout (Ex Libris library)

They do both Promptcat and Bib Note. They check only 245-260 and send the book on its way. One person is able to do all the PromptCat titles. They tried having acquisitions staff do the work but found it wasn't successful so now it is a trained copy cataloger who checks the records. Their profile is just for DLC/DLC records. [The librarian doing Baker and Taylor did more libraries but not UKM - fewer DLC records for kids books]. USMAI has been successful in matching on the OCLC number only in Aleph. They have a purchasing profile with BNA - accept everything sent.  They are not entering orders until the item arrives. If you are an enhance  library you'll get it back in Bib Note unless you fix the profile to not get them. Bib Note starts for records cataloged after you start the subscription. Do a separate loader in Aleph because you want those to overlay.

           

MONDAY--June 27

 

8:30-12:30      Hyatt  Grand Ballroom A

                        CC:DA  -- Liaison

 

Don Chatham talked about publishing RDA. A project manager will be hired for the publishing of RDA with the ability to promote communication among interested parties. Need to address how RDA will related to the Cataloger's Desktop. Map cataloging is moving to the Desktop. Jennifer Bowen said the goal is to create a web product first. JSC is looking for input on how we want it to work. We'd like to be able to find e.g. all rules needed to catalog a globe - will need complex XML attributes. The information is really very hierarchical in print, but may not need to be so deeply with XML where it can be linked in multiple ways. A number of design suggestions were given.

 

J. Bowen continued her report. At Big Heads she described the process as one of trying to be helpful and improve communications as ALA representative rather than just CC:DA's rep to JSC. People seem to be really caring about RDA. CC:DA site will have presentations. The RDA product will need Alpha and Beta testing. A document on how to test will be devised. For LITA this could take the form of usability, viewability, navigation - if you ask for a task force to review, they must comments or not be on the task force and must reply by deadlines.

 

Discussed LC's response. Again, the issue of rules together came up. If we have rules together about the title, it should give all - descripton, source, notes, etc. The principle would be put the information where the elements are. Another: stuff about the source for title be spsecific and evertying else can be from anywhere, e.g. determining the source of the title can be difficult for multiparts and then you need a priority list to follow. Following a priority may be different for some communities that have had different priorities. Most attendees liked LC's response on this issue. You almost always need a source of title note.

 

Another issue of concern is whether an item is published or not. In the proposed revision A1.4C it says "optionally identify the place of publication … "  - why not instead address this in levels of description, e.g. minimal, standard, all. This area needs to be flexible for a broader group of works, e.g. place of creation for artistics works, because theoretically since they aren't published, they can use the rule for place. In the proposed revision, A1.4E. Date is sounds like one can only do publication date (i.e. only for published works) but the intention was all dates as we have done in the past. Discussion is on Confluence.

 

Discussion of 5JSC/chair/5. The general feeling was the rules in 21 need to stay. There is an expectation that other communities will have to write up instruction manuals and libraries will need to buy them, despite the fact the original goal of JSC was to create rules that could be applied by anyone for anything without additional manuals. JSC intends to refer out to these other manuals.

 

What about LCRI's? LC will no longer produce a document tied to AACR/RDA. It will continue to provide guidance. LC is continuing to review chap. 21. "Primary access point" idea will replace "main entry". Current OPAC performance should not drive our decisions.

 

5JSC/chair/6. A task force has been formed to address the GMD/SMD issues.

 

CC:DA's response to Part 1 draft will need to say "blah" is okay and "blah-blah" is definitely not. JSC will compare responses.

 

A task force has been set up to review Rules for Technical Description of Digital Media, with a focus on data elements.

 

There will be a pre-conference on Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) at 2006 Annual.

 

The task force on "Differences between, changes within" document for serials is working on updating it.

 

MARBI report. See MARBI

 

DCRMB is asking CC:DA for comment. A task force has been formed.

 

 

 

12:00-1:30        Hilton  International ballroom - need invitation - registered

            OCLC Luncheon 

 

Update similar to breakfast with a few more details.

 

           

2:00-4:00        Palmer - PDR 16

                        SAC -- General meeting

 

MARBI report. See MARBI

Bonnie needs feedback about the issue of including subjects in expression authority records by midwinter. Can we all add to? Is it required or suggested? Is this in place of putting on individual bibs? Need to coordinate with a similar IFLA task force chaired by Marcia Zeng.

 

There will be a FAST program in 2006 Sat. 1:30-3:30

 

FAST geographics - OCLC is going to look at BGN names.

 

David Miller reported that he was able to successfully use the Reference Structure report with the III Users Group to affect some changes.

 

ARLIS liaison to SAC will probably be approved.

 

NLM is changing how records are being distributed. They had separated subject trees, and then reassembled them for bibs. Beginning Dec. 2005 they will not be reassembled and will look like they do in Locator Plus.