We hope you all get a chance to enjoy some time away next week. There
will be a skeleton crew here if you need us. In fact, it looks like some
of us have packed up and left already.
You would think today's the End of the World or something. J
Take care,
Nate
Nate Cothran
Vice President, Automation Services
533 East 1860 South
Provo, Utah 84606
Phone: +1.800.288.1265, ext. 697
Direct: +1.801.342.5697
nate(a)bslw.com
<mailto:nate@bslw.com?subject=Automation%20Services%20-%20Inquiry> *
www.bslw.com <http://www.bslw.com>
As part of the conversion of the LC NAF, the 7XX fields on AACR2 records
that have RDA forms (7XX _ 4) need to be removed and/or evaluated.
There have been about 14,700 records identified that can be dealt with
programmatically. These changes will be done in the LC database and
distributed through the regular LC distributions. The project to do
this will start January 7, 2013. They will change about 4000 records per
day until done.
This means there will be a few weekly update files from LC that will be
significanly larger than usual. We want to make sure everyone is aware
of these upcoming changes. If you have questions or concerns about how
this will affect you and what your options are, please contact your
project manager.
Since it looks like the announcement was only sent to the PCC list, I'm
including it in it's entirety below:
"The PCC Acceptable Headings Implementation Task Group (PCCAHITG)
designed plan for changes to the LC/NACO Authority File in the context
of the adoption of RDA, including the phased changes to the authority
file. As you are aware, the Phase 1 changes were completed in August
2012, and Phase 2 changes are scheduled for 2013.
The Task Group has also identified a small subset of records that have
7XX fields with RDA forms that need to be dealt with before the Phase 2
changes begins. After reviewing options for manually changing the
records, the Task Group developed plans to adjust most of the records
automatically by program and issued that plan for comment on September
27th, 2012
(http://files.library.northwestern.edu/public/pccahitg/RDA_conversion.Rd
a7xxFields.Automated.doc). In moving forward with this plan, a program
was developed by Gary Strawn at Northwestern University. Over 17,000
records were identified, although some of these records will be reserved
for manual treatment. After extensive testing by LC and Northwestern
University, the number of records to be programmatically changed will be
about 14,700. Categories of records that won't be adjusted
programmaticaly include pre-AACR2 records (008/10= a,b, or d), records
that contain a 7XX with an element that is a candidate for a change in
Phase 2 regardless of the field in which it appears (e.g., abbreviations
such as fl., ca., arr., O.T., Dept. ), records containing "Jr." in the
700 field, and others where the 7XX and 1XX were significantly different
so as to warrant manual review.
Like the Phase 1 changes, these records will be adjusted in the LC
database and distributed to the NACO nodes and other CDS customers. The
changes will begin January 7, 2013, with about 4,000 records adjusted
per day until it is completed. These records will be issued in addition
to the regular distribution of LC/NACO transactions.
Once this small project related to RDA 7XX fields is completed, testing
of the logic for the Phase 2 changes must begin-- we are now recruiting
volunteers to help with this testing. If you are interested in helping,
please send a note to the PCCAHITG member Karen Anderson
kanderson(a)bslw.com by January 4, 2013. The timing of the Phase 2
changes will be dependent on successful testing, so any help is greatly
appreciated."
As you can see, I'm on the PCCAHITG, so if you have any questions about
the RDA/NAF conversion, feel free to contact me.
Karen Anderson
Authority Control Librarian
Backstage Library Works
Provo, Ut
801-356-1852 ext. 231
800-288-1265
kanderson(a)bslw.com
In geology, stratification can refer to the different layers of rocks
that have formed over a given number of years. When it concerns AACR2
and RDA bib records, the word 'stratification' has started to gradually
build up significant meaning for us here at Backstage.
During my time spent as a member for the recent PCC Post-Implementation
Task Group on Hybrid Bibliographic Records
<http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&
ved=0CEAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.loc.gov%2Faba%2Fpcc%2Frda%2FRDA%2520T
ask%2520groups%2520and%2520charges%2FPCC-Hybrid-Bib-Rec-Guidelines-TG-Re
port.docx&ei=Zce_UI67JKq5igKw04AI&usg=AFQ> (June - Oct 2012), we
discussed whether it was a good idea to suggest the creation of a new ID
(040 subfield) for hybridized AACR2 bib records. The consensus was
against this idea.
So we are left with bibs that are either RDA or non-RDA. This is an
oversimplification, but I'm hoping more explanation below might help
illustrate some of our concerns.
Our task group also could not definitively establish what the
'tipping-point' would be for determining when a bib record has crossed
the threshold from AACR2 bib to clearly an RDA bib. We seemed to settle
on the actual designation (i.e., adding 040 $e rda) only when the
cataloger has the item in-hand and is re-describing the record to RDA
format.
Lacking the item in-hand means that the AACR2 bib could have any number
of RDA-type elements (33X, etc) added to it, but the sum of these added
fields still is not enough to confidently re-describe the bib as RDA. I
think one of the main reasons was that, technically, most or all of
these RDA-element fields are also fine being in AACR2 bibs.
This brings us back to the stratification issue. Even though there may
be many layers of fields added which would surely tip it over into being
an RDA bib record, we cannot with confidence call it RDA unless there is
an 040 $e rda field present. As there is no definitive ID present in a
bib that has had RDA-type fields added to it-assuming absence of 040 $e
rda-then our conclusion is that the record must be in AACR2 format. This
doesn't seem right, but it is the case today.
Consequences of this way of thinking means that, for some libraries that
have us remove relationship designators (X00 $e) in AACR2 bibs but
retain them in RDA bibs might run the risk of having us remove those
from AACR2 bibs that have been hybridized with RDA elements. This is
probably not desirable? And there might be other types of updates or
validation (e.g., 250, 260, 300 field expanding abbreviations) performed
on AACR2 or RDA records that would be preferable to also apply to those
special hybrid AACR2 records.
We welcome your thoughts on these types of matters as we inch ever
closer to March 31, 2013.
Nate Cothran
Vice President, Automation Services
533 East 1860 South
Provo, Utah 84606
Phone: +1.800.288.1265, ext. 697
Direct: +1.801.342.5697
nate(a)bslw.com
<mailto:nate@bslw.com?subject=Automation%20Services%20-%20Inquiry> *
www.bslw.com
