Wendy and others
Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) was the last of the FRBR family of models to be published, in 2010. RDA was in its initial version at that point, with just a placeholder for subject authority records at RDA 23.
FRSAD radically alters the FRBR and FRAD treatment of subjects by giving a general model that acknowledges and accommodates the range and variety of approaches to subject authority control, whether through classification, subject headings, faceted classifications, thesauri, encyclopedias, etc.
As a result, RDA is unlikely to provide instructions for using a specific approach or scheme, in much the same way it doesn't specify an encoding scheme for RDA data itself.
The FRBR Review Group is in the middle of consolidating the family into a single coherent model. Although nothing has been finalised, reviewed, or approved, I think it is unlikely that FRBR Group 3 will remain as part of the high-level model: the categorization of subjects as Concept, Event, Object, and Place, in addition to Group 1 and Group 2 entities, is only one (Western/Anglophone) way amongst many.
So the consolidation and further development of FRBR is also unlikely to result in anything other than a very general treatment of subject authorities by RDA. The basic FRSAD model is Work-has as subject-Thema; Thema is any kind of entity that is the subject of the work, labelled by a Nomen such as a classification notation, code, controlled term, etc. I don't think RDA will say much more than this.
So choice of subject authority is likely to remain a local issue.
From: CIG E-Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendy Taylor
Sent: 24 October 2012 11:52
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CIG-E-FORUM] RDA and dewey
Can I ask a general (and possibly stupid!) question? Why aren't dewey and subjects included in RDA?