RDA and the Dublin Core Community
RDA
and the Dublin Core Community
What We can Learn
from
Each Other
Mary S. Woodley
CSU Northridge
20 Jan 2007 ALA
midwinter
Approach
of This Presentation
- Describe how the
standards developed by both communities have their strengths and weaknesses
- Review what each community
can bring to the table
- Provide suggestions
concerning the focus and directions the RDA process is taking
SWOT
S Strengths
W Weaknesses
O Opportunities
T Threats
ROT
R Redundancy
O Obsolete
T Trivial
Strengths
of Library Community Experience and Practice
- Authority work
- Rigorous content standards
- End user focus?
- Over 100 years of
practice*
*or millennia if go back to clay tablets
and scrolls
Weaknesses
of
- Book/print bias
- Rule driven not principle
driven
- Overly complex rules
that require intensive training
- Too expensive
- Too much ROT
- Structure based on
a linear card catalog model
- User studies needed
- Not clear how RDA
will implement FRBR
User
Expectations?
LucasArts Monkey Island 2
Expectations
of Users
- Simple keyword searching
- See cover, title page,
table of contents, index, select pages
- Ranked reviews by
others
- Listen to snippets
of music
- “Spell check”
Did mean ….
- Limit by format before
searching
- Participant not just
passive user
- Suggested other reading
Online
Card Catalog
LucasArts Monkey Island 2
Opportunities Threats
- Work closely with
other metadata communities
- Transform the structure
of information
- Increase integration
with other information services
- Adopt “application
profile” approach to support special library needs
- Library community
will loose credibility by not exploiting technology and reuse of content
already created
- Becoming less viable
for finding information -- not the first choice for information discovery
“ ... if we in the library field do
not develop cataloging rules that can be used for this digital reality,
we will find once again that non-librarians will take the lead in an
area that we have assumed is ours. We need to apply the principle of
least effort, since we know that cataloging as it has been done is increasingly
un-affordable. And we need to create cataloging rules that take into
account the reality of machine-to-machine communication and the derivation
of data elements by algorithms.”
--
Karen Coyle, email to the MARC list
Thanks to Diane Hillmann
Threats
Strengths
Weaknesses
- Relatively simple
metadata set with straight forward rules
- Application Profiles
to meet community needs
- Relatively easy to
train and implement
- Based (now) on a conceptual
model
- Inconsistent implementation
- Use of authorized
access points not required
- Mere 12 years of practice
- Digital bias
Opportunities Threats
- Develop an ongoing
dialogue between the DC and Library communities
- Encourage sufficient
guidance without creating a rule to cover possible situation
- Lack of acceptance
as a viable alternative in the Library community
- Lack of understanding
of the basic principles
What
other Metadata Communities Bring to the Table
- Advocate the development
of a coherent conceptual model BEFORE developing the principles upon
which rules are written
- Support the approach
to use principles to determine the mechanisms of cataloging
- Stress the necessity
of:
- Simplicity
- Consistency
- Elegance
- Build consensus about
the “big picture” before arguing minutiae
The
Real Questions
1. Legacy cataloging:
How much pain and expense are we willing
to tolerate?
2. Radical changes:
How far can we push the envelope without
breaking the systems?
3. Process
Are we able to discuss the big picture
before fighting over the details?
Recommendations
- Top down process of
development
- Devise a realistic
development timeline
- Do not use AACR2 as
sole source of ideas
- Clarify decision-making
authority and responsibility
- Provide more access
to work in progress for feedback -- people do understand they are works
in progress
URL
to presentation
http://library.csun.edu/mwoodley/DCRDAatERIG2.ppt