Thanks for your comments Frank.

   

Just to pick up on one of your points (apologies it's a bit late!) one of my concerns has been the display of, for example, ebooks.

We have separate electronic and print records in our catalogue, so say for example a user searches for "Genocide in international law", in the brief search results list they will see

Genocide in international law with a classmark and a location, and

Genocide in international law [electronic resource] with the phrase 'electronic resource. Click here to access'

so it's relatively straightfoward, from the basic search results to see that we have this in both e and print and to decide which one you want.

   

I've realised that I'm not quite technically minded enough to work out how the 336-8 will display for us in the OPAC in comparison to the existing 245 $h.   

And whether having ebooks displayed in the old way, alongside the new way will cause confusion... you'd already be surprised at some of the more basic queries encountered on help desks...

   

Helen

---

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frank Watson
Sent: 19 April 2011 11:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Welcome to CIG-e-forum Day 2

Hello everyone,

   

As a developer for a LMS, we're not expecting to see significant problems with a hybrid database of AACR2 and RDA records. Having worked for and with several system suppliers over many years, in the design of a catalogue, one is much more concerned with the (logical) form of the data than the content (although I should emphasise, not exclusively). I'm not a cataloguer and some of changes can seem a little 'arcane' to the unitiated, so if my comments are off the point, I apologise.

   

I think there are a few areas which may need some care - not least, the issue of possible changes to the form of, for example, personal names .. the inclusion of "Jr." as part of the name rather than a separate subfield and the subsequent issue of matching or not to existing authorised forms, but this has been noted by others already.

   

Another example is the handling of parallel titles, I think, where in RDA, parallel titles are include in full in 245, as well as, possibly, in tag 246, so for example if we display 245 and 246 in an output, then do we end up repeating the same information several times ? As it happens, I think the way we parameterise the displays allows us to test (say) the 040$e to be able to take this sort of decision.

   

There are other changes which, I think, limit some of the functionality which we can currently provide (but fairly minor, I think)  - for example, in certain situations in record loading we attempt to use the edition statement to narrow down a list of matches; replacing "4th ed" by "fourth edition" would make this a lot harder to do.

   

HOWEVER, I see that several people have expressed some concern about the mixing and matching of RDA and earlier forms. I would be most interested to know if there are some objective problems which we're not aware of, or whether this is more a vague disquiet about the ability of vendors and LMS' to be able to support the situation.

 

Regards

  Frank Watson

   

 

Frank Watson | Senior Consultant | UK Libraries Division | Infor | 2 Westpoint Row, Bradley Stoke, Bristol, BS32 4QG | Tel +44 (0) 145-489-2200 | DDI +44 (0) 145-489-2262 | | Email [log in to unmask]

---

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lesley Creamer
Sent: 19 April 2011 10:30
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Welcome to CIG-e-forum Day 2

Morning all.

 

As a record creator/supplier I’d be very interested to hear if anyone has had meaningful discussions about RDA implementation with library system suppliers. We’ll be able to supply RDA tags correctly (thinking specifically about new tags such as the 33Xs) and remove redundant subfields such as 245 $h but if the LMSs haven’t been changed to accommodate these… An even more unfortunate scenario would be that some will be able to but not others! Years of experience in the industry has shown that we’ll be very lucky if all libraries decide to accept the same ‘standards’ – even without the generous options provided in RDA.

 

BDS has always tried to stick as closely to all the various rules and standards as possible and practical and we take our lead from the BL. In whatever form RDA might be accepted, we will endeavour to follow. As I mentioned yesterday, I’m concerned at the implications to productivity of no rule of three, extra name authority checking, even, I suppose, of eliminating cataloguers’ abbreviations although I’m sure we’ll be able to set up templates, etc. to get round most of these. We simply can’t afford to have dips in productivity.

 

As far as training is concerned, we’re obviously in a different situation from many. We will arrange for someone to come to BDS to give formal training to our cataloguers and do in-house training with our cataloguing assistants.

 

As far as hybrid records are concerned, I don’t see any way of avoiding that. Our Z39.50 service BDZ takes both our own records and those of the BL without modification so I think AACR will sit alongside RDA in the future. We can probably do some sort of conversion if required – I’m thinking the Bible wouldn’t present any major difficulties, for example, but it would be useful to get some idea of how our customers view that. Are people really going to be bothered about a mixture of p. and pages, ill. and illustrations?

 

Lesley

 

 

From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Helen Williams
Sent: 19 April 2011 09:08
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Welcome to CIG-e-forum Day 2

 

Good morning everyone, and welcome from me as well to Day 2 of the e-forum. 

 

Celine has posted a summary of the discussions that we had yesterday, so if you want to refresh your memory, or you're joining us for Day 2, then that would be a good place to start.  Feel free to pick up points from the summary which you would like to discuss further. 

 

We thought we'd start today with some discussion about vendors/record supply issues and Library Management Systems.

 

Some topics to get us going might include :

 

Have you had any contact with vendors/suppliers about this?  (or are you a vendor or supplier, and what contact have you had from your customers?)

What kind of questions have you, or would you like to ask?

Would any of our record suppliers be willing to comment about the kind of issues facing them in dealing with RDA?

Have you thought about issues with RDA and your LMS?  What are your key areas of concern?

Have you been in contact with your LMS supplier, or spoken to anyone in your IT/systems department?

 

This afternoon we'll move on to think about implementation issues, and we have some more questions to stimulate discussion then.

 

It was great to have such wide ranging discussion yesterday, and we're looking forward to more today, so please do enjoy getting involved.

 

Helen

Helen Williams

Assistant Librarian, Bibliographic Services
Library
The London School of Economics and Political Science
10 Portugal Street
London WC2A 2HD

[log in to unmask]
020 7955 7234

 

Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer

________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________

Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://lse.ac.uk/emailDisclaimer