Free Blogger Templates

Cataloging Metadata Examples : RDA AACR2 LCSH LCC DDC MARC-21 BIBFRAME Etc.

CATALOGING METADATA EXAMPLES RDA AACR2 LCSH LCC DDC MARC-21 BIBFRAME MODS DUBLIN CORE


Bibliographic and Authority record examples of cataloguing with Resource Description and Access (RDA), Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Library of Congress Classification (LCC), Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), MARC 21, BIBFRAME (Bibliographic Framework), Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2), ISBD, MODS, Dublin Core, etc.



Contents


  • Featured Library Cataloging Example
  • Cataloging and Metadata Terminology
  • Cataloging Examples of Bibliographic and Authority Records
    • Cataloging Example of a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC
  • Cataloging Examples of Relationship Designators in Authority Records
  • MARC Bibliographic and RDA Rules Instructions and Examples
  • MARC Authority and RDA Rules Instructions and Examples
  • References



Note
  • This article can be viewed best on a desktop or a laptop. 
  • This list of cataloging examples is under development. Gradually we will be adding new examples to this collection.




Beinecke Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States 




FEATURED LIBRARY CATALOGING EXAMPLE



Cataloging Example of a monograph/book/volume/text: RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC, MODS, ISBD

Survey of Emerging Cataloging Practices : Use of RDA by Academic Libraries / by Salman Haider & Primary Research Group Staff. - New York : Primary Research Group, 2016. (111 pages ; 28 cm.). ISBN: 9781574403831.


Survey of Emerging Cataloging Practices : Use of RDA by Academic Libraries



MARC FIELD TAGMARC 21 FIELDINDICATORSDATA RECORDED
000Leader01499cam a22003975i 4500
001Control Number21035302
005Date and Time of Latest Transaction20190626080219.0
008Fixed-Length Data Elements190626t20162016nyua 000 0 eng d
010Library of Congress Control Number|a 2019295036
016National Bibliographic Agency Control Number7_|a 017845848 |2 Uk
020International Standard Book Number|a 1574403834
020International Standard Book Number|a 9781574403831
035System Control Number|a (OCoLC)ocn949911758
040Cataloging Source|a YDXCP |b eng |c YDXCP |e rda |d IQU |d BTCTA |d OCLCF |d HLS |d OCLCQ |d HUL |d UKMGB |d DLC
042Authentication Code|a lccopycat
050Library of Congress Call Number00|a Z694.15.R47 |b H35 2016
082Dewey Decimal Classification Number04|a 025.32 |2 23
100Main Entry--Personal Name1_|a Haider, Salman, |e author.
245Title Statement10|a Survey of emerging cataloging practices : |b use of RDA by academic libraries / |c by Salman Haider and Primary Research Group Staff.
264Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture, and Copyright Notice_1|a New York : |b Primary Research Group, |c [2016]
264Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture, and Copyright Notice_4|c ©2016
300Physical Description__|a 111 pages : |b illustrations ; |c 28 cm
336Content Type__|a text |b txt |2 rdacontent
337Media Type__|a unmediated |b n |2 rdamedia
338Carrier Type__|a volume |b nc |2 rdacarrier
630Subject Added Entry-Uniform Title00|a Resource description & access.
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_0|a Academic libraries.
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_0|a Descriptive cataloging |v Rules.
630Subject Added Entry-Uniform Title07|a Resource description & access. |2 fast |0 (OCoLC)fst01791077
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_7|a Academic libraries. |2 fast |0 (OCoLC)fst00794997
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_7|a Descriptive cataloging. |2 fast |0 (OCoLC)fst00891123
655Index Term-Genre/Form_7|a Rules. |2 fast |0 (OCoLC)fst01423857
710Added Entry-Corporate Name2_|a Primary Research Group, |e author, |e issuing body.


Screenshots of Catalog Records


OCLC WorldCat



British Library



Library of Congress



Library of Congress - MODS Record



University of Chicago



Harvard University









New York Public Library, New York, United States




CATALOGING AND METADATA TERMINOLOGY



Some important cataloging and metadata terms are described in brief below. These are taken from the Glossary of Library and Information Science. Visit the glossary to get the links and description of the original articles and also to see other terms required for a better understanding of cataloguing.

Access Point - Access Point refers to a name, term, code, heading, word, phrase etc., a unit of information representing a specific entity that can serve as a search key in information retrieval, under which a library catalog or bibliographic database may be searched and library materials may be identified and retrieved. In a catalog, index, or other organized systems some examples of access points are, author, title, name (person, family, corporate body, etc.), subjects (topical, geographical, etc.), classification or call number, and codes such as ISBN, etc. which are chosen by the cataloger or indexer, when creating a bibliographic, authority, or metadata record (a surrogate), to enable the retrieval of the record. In modern cataloging using advanced Integrated Library Systems (ILS), the machine-readable cataloging, almost any portion of the catalog record can serve as an access point. The advanced search of the Online Public Access Catalogs provides many options as access points.

Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR, AACR2, AACR2R) - Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) is the essential international cataloguing code used for descriptive cataloging of various types of information resources by libraries in the United States, Great Britain, Canada, and Australia as well as in many other countries. It was first developed in 1967 and updated regularly until 2005. The revisions and updates of the standard are referred to as AACR2. The second edition of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) is the most widely used cataloging code, designed for use in the construction of catalogs and other lists in general libraries of all sizes. AACR2 comprise a detailed set of rules and guidelines for producing metadata in a surrogate record to represent a library resource. The rules cover the standard description of areas like, the title, publisher, edition, series, etc., as well as the provision of choice and form of access points (headings) for all materials which a library may hold or to which it may have access, including books, serials, cartographic materials, electronic resources, etc. AACR also provides rules for the formulation of standard forms of names and titles to provide access to and grouping of those descriptions. AACR2 standardized cataloging and ensured consistency within the catalog and between the catalogs of libraries using the same code in describing the physical attributes of library materials identically. AACR marked a shift from the previous cataloging rules, which were criticized for being too detailed, complex, and mere compilations of rules to handle specific bibliographic cases. Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules are considered as the most important advances in English-language codes for descriptive cataloging during the twentieth century.

Authority Record - Authority Record is a record which gives the authoritative form (the form selected for a heading) of a personal name, corporate name, family name, place name, uniform or preferred title, series title, subject, etc. in the library catalog or the file of bibliographic records, and are listed in an authority file containing headings of library items. To ensure consistency, an authority record is created for each authorized heading (authorized access point) for a proper name or a subject, etc. An authority record is made when a heading is established, i.e., authorized for use as the main entry (preferred title and, if appropriate, the authorized access point for the creator), an added entry, or subject entry, for the first time, while cataloging of a library item. Authority record may be in a printed or machine-readable form.

BIBFRAME - BIBFRAME (Bibliographic Framework) is a data model for bibliographic description. BIBFRAME was designed to replace the MARC standards, and to use linked data principles to make bibliographic data more useful both within and outside the library community. The MARC Standards, which BIBFRAME seeks to replace, were developed by Henriette Avram at the US Library of Congress during the 1960s. By 1971, MARC formats had become the national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data in the United States, and the international standard by 1973. In a provocatively titled 2002 article, library technologist Roy Tennant argued that "MARC Must Die", noting that the standard was old; used only within the library community; and designed to be a display, rather than a storage or retrieval format. A 2008 report from the Library of Congress wrote that MARC is "based on forty-year-old techniques for data management and is out of step with programming styles of today." In 2012, the Library of Congress announced that it had contracted with Zepheira, a data management company, to develop a linked data alternative to MARC. Later that year, the library announced a new model called MARC Resources (MARCR). That November, the library released a more complete draft of the model, renamed BIBFRAME. The Library of Congress released version 2.0 of BIBFRAME in 2016.

Cataloging - Cataloging or Library Cataloging is the process of creating and maintaining bibliographic and authority records of the library catalog, the database of books, serials, sound recordings, moving images, cartographic materials, computer files, e-resources etc. that are owned by a library. The catalog may be in tangible form, such as a card catalog or in electronic form, such as online public access catalog (OPAC). The process of cataloging involves two major activities, viz. Descriptive Cataloging and Subject Cataloging. In Descriptive Cataloging, we describe details of library resources, such as the name of creator(s), contributor(s), titles, edition, publication, distribution, date, physical description, series etc. Two popular standards for Descriptive Cataloging are Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) and its successor Resource Description and Access (RDA). Subject cataloging involves subject analysis of the resource and assignment of classification numbers using schemes such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) and providing subject headings using schemes such as Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH).

Descriptive Cataloging - Descriptive Cataloging includes recording the attributes of a library item, such as the name of author(s), contributor(s), title, edition, publisher, distributor, date, the number of pages, its size, name of series, etc. Descriptive Cataloging enables the user to find and identify a book, by the name of the author, the title, variant titles, etc. Two popular standards for Descriptive Cataloging are Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) and its successor Resource Description and Access (RDA).

Extended Date Time Format (EDTF) - The Extended Date/Time Format (EDTF) is a draft date-time standard initiated by the Library of Congress with the intention of creating more explicit date formatting and addressing date types that are not currently regulated by ISO 8601. The date time format ISO 8601 describes a number of date/time features, some of which are redundant and/or not very useful, on the other hand, there are a number of date and time format conventions in common use that are not included in ISO 8601. EDTF responds to a need for a date/time string more expressive than ISO 8601 can support. Current suggestions for additions are being noted and discussed within the EDTF community with the intention of formalizing the EDTF as an ISO 8601 amendment or as an extension to other Web-based date standards. EDTF defines features to be supported in a date/time string, features considered useful for a wide variety of applications.

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) - Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR /ˈfɜːrbər/) is a conceptual entity-relationship model developed by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) that relates user tasks of retrieval and access in online library catalogs and bibliographic databases from a user’s perspective. It represents a more holistic approach to retrieval and access as the relationships between the entities provide links to navigate through the hierarchy of relationships. The model is significant because it is separate from specific cataloging standards such as Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) or International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD).

Library Classification - Classification or Library Classification or Book Classification or Bibliographic Classification is the process of arranging, grouping, coding, and organizing books and other library materials (e.g. serials, sound recordings, moving images, cartographic materials, manuscripts, computer files, e-resources etc.) on shelves or entries of a catalog, bibliography, and index according to their subject in a systematic, logical, and helpful order by way of assigning them call numbers using a library classification system, so that users can find them as quickly and easily as possible. Call number consists of a class number providing class designation, a book number providing author representation, and a collection number denoting the collection to which it belongs. In ordinary classification, we deal with the arrangement of ideas and the objects in a systematic order. But in library classification, we are concerned with documents, and the aim is to arrange these in the most helpful and permanent order. Similar to knowledge classification systems, bibliographic classification systems group entities that are similar and related together typically arranged in a hierarchical tree-type structure (assuming non-faceted system; a faceted classification system allows the assignment of multiple classifications to an object, enabling the classifications to be ordered in multiple ways).

Library of Congress Classification - The Library of Congress Classification (LCC) is a system of library classification developed by the Library of Congress. It was developed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to organize and arrange the book collections of the Library of Congress. Over the course of the twentieth century, the system was adopted for use by other libraries as well, especially large academic libraries in the United States. It is currently one of the most widely used library classification systems in the world. The Library's Policy and Standards Division maintains and develops the system. In recent decades, as the Library of Congress made its records available electronically through its online catalog, more libraries have adopted LCC for both subject cataloging as well as shelflisting. There are several classification schemes in use worldwide. Besides LCC, the other popular ones among them are Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), and Bliss Bibliographic Classification (BC). Out of these, DDC and LCC are the classification systems which are most commonly used in libraries. The potential of Library of Congress Classification (LCC) system is yet to be explored in libraries. This article describes the various aspects of LCC and its suitability as a library classification system for classifying library resources. The Library of Congress was established in 1800 when the American legislatures were preparing to move from Philadelphia to the new capital city of Washington, D.C. Its earliest classification system was by size and, within each size group, by accession number. First recorded change in the arrangement of the collection appeared in the library’s third catalog, issued in 1808, which showed added categories for special bibliographic forms such as legal documents and executive papers. On the night of August 24, 1814, during the war of 1812, British soldiers set fire to the Capitol, and most of the Library of Congress’s collections were destroyed. Sometimes after, Thomas Jefferson offered to sell to Congress his personal library; subsequently, in 1815, the Congress purchased Jefferson’s personal library of 6,487 books. The books arrived already classified by Jefferson’s own system. The library adopted this system and used it with some modifications until the end of the nineteenth century. Library of Congress moved to a new building in 1897. By this time, the Library’s collection had grown to one and a half million volumes and it was decided that Jefferson’s classification system was no longer adequate for the collection. A more detailed classification scheme was required for such a huge and rapidly growing collection of documents. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Cutter’s Expansive Classification and the German Halle Schema were studied, but none was considered suitable. It was decided to construct a new system to be called the Library of Congress Classification (LCC). James C.M. Hanson, Head of the Catalog Division, and Charles Martel, Chief Classifier, were made responsible for developing the new scheme. Hanson and Martel concluded that the new classification should be based on Cutter’s Expansive Classification⁴ as a guide for the order of classes, but with a considerably modified notation. Work on the new classification began in 1901. The first outline of the Library of Congress Classification was published in 1904 by Charles Martel and J.C.M. Hanson – the two fathers of Library of Congress Classification. Class Z (Bibliography and Library Science) was chosen to be the first schedule to be developed. The next schedules, E-F (American history and geography), were developed. But E-F were the first schedules to be published, in 1901, followed by Z in 1902. Other schedules were progressively developed. Each schedule of LCC contains an entire class, a subclass, or a group of subclasses. The separate schedules were published in print volumes, as they were completed. All schedules were published by 1948, except the Class K (Law). The first Law schedule—the Law of United States, was published in 1969, and the last of the Law schedules to publish was KB—Religious law, which appeared in 2004. From the beginning, individual schedules of LCC have been developed and maintained by subject experts. Such experts continue to be responsible for additions and changes in LCC. The separate development of individual schedules meant that, unlike other classification systems, LCC was not the product of one mastermind; indeed, LCC has been called “a coordinated series of special classes”. Until the early 1990s, LCC schedules existed mainly as a print product. The conversion of LCC to machine-readable form began in 1993 and was completed in 1996. The conversion to electronic form was done using USMARC (now called MARC21) Classification Format. This was a very important development for LCC, as it enabled LCC to be consulted online and much more efficient production of the print schedules. In the year 2013, the Library of Congress announced a transition to online-only publication of its cataloging documentation, including the Library of Congress Classification. It was decided, the Library’s Cataloging Distribution Service (CDS) will no longer print new editions of its subject headings, classification schedules, and other cataloging publications. The Library decided to provide free downloadable PDF versions of LCC schedules. For users desiring enhanced functionality, the Library’s two web-based subscription services, Cataloger’s Desktop and Classification Web will continue as products from CDS. Classification Web is a web-based tool for LCC and LCSH. It supports searching and browsing of the LCC schedules and provides links to the respective tables to build the class numbers for library resources. LC has also developed training materials on the principles and practices of LCC and made those available for free on its website.

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) - Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is the list of headings produced from the subject authority file maintained by the United States Library of Congress for use in bibliographic records. It is popularly known by its abbreviation as LCSH and is sometimes used interchangeably with the phrase subject authority file. LCSH is a multidisciplinary vocabulary that includes headings in all subjects, from science to religion, to history, social science, education, literature, and philosophy. It also includes headings for geographic features, ethnic groups, historical events, building names, etc. Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is the most widely used subject vocabulary in the world. It is the model for many other vocabularies in English and other languages and has been translated into numerous languages. The strongest aspect of LCSH is that it represents subject headings of the Library of Congress, the national library of the United States, one of the richest of national libraries of the world. The administrative and managerial machinery of LC has made it possible for LCSH to stand out as an undisputed leader. LCSH is also used as indexing vocabulary in a number of published bibliographies. LCSH comprise a thesaurus or a controlled vocabulary of subject headings which is used by a cataloger or an indexer to assign subject headings to a bibliographic record to represent the subject of a work he/she is cataloging. LCSH contain the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) that are assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonym terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as the subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject. The fortieth edition of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH 40) contains headings established by the Library through January 2018. The headings included in this list were obtained by creating a file consisting of all subject heading and subdivision records in verified status in the subject authority file at the Library of Congress. There were 342,947 authority records in the file then. The subject authority database from which the headings in this edition were drawn indicates that the file contains approximately 24,390 personal name headings of which 23,272 represent family names, 10,034 corporate headings, 6 meeting or conference headings, 481 uniform titles, 242,511 topical subject headings, and 61,885 geographic subject headings. There are 764 general USE references, 4,351 general see also references, 299,751 references from one usable heading to another, and 362,646 references from unused terms to used headings. The creation and revision of subject headings is a continuous process. Approximately 5,000 new headings, including headings with subdivisions, are added to LCSH each year. Proposals for new headings and revisions to existing ones are submitted by catalogers at the Library of Congress and by participants in the Subject Authority Cooperative Program (SACO). More information on SACO may be found at <URL http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc>. Approved proposals become part of the online authority file of subject headings at the Library of Congress, from which various publications are created. Five services provide information about new and revised headings. First, a distribution service supplies the subject headings in the MARC 21 authorities format via Internet FTP on a weekly basis to supplement the master database file of subject authority records. Second, L.C. Subject Headings Monthly Lists are a timely source of information about new and changed subject headings, class numbers, references and scope notes. The lists are posted monthly to the World Wide Web at http://www.loc.gov/aba/cataloging/subject/weeklylists. Third, Classification Web provides World Wide Web access to Library of Congress Subject Headings and Library of Congress Classification to subscribers. Fourth, subject authority records are included in the Library’s Web authorities service and may be searched and viewed at http://authorities.loc.gov. Fifth, subject authorities are freely available for searching and download through the Library’s Linked Data Service at http://id.loc.gov.

MARC 21 - MARC (MAchine-Readable Cataloging) standards are a set of digital formats for the description of items catalogued by libraries, such as books. Working with the Library of Congress, American computer scientist Henriette Avram developed MARC in the 1960s to create records that could be read by computers and shared among libraries. By 1971, MARC formats had become the US national standard for dissemination of bibliographic data. Two years later, they became the international standard. There are several versions of MARC in use around the world, the most predominant being MARC 21, created in 1999 as a result of the harmonization of U.S. and Canadian MARC formats, and UNIMARC, widely used in Europe. The MARC 21 family of standards now includes formats for authority records, holdings records, classification schedules, and community information, in addition to the format for bibliographic records. MARC 21 was designed to redefine the original MARC record format for the 21st century and to make it more accessible to the international community. MARC 21 has formats for the following five types of data: Bibliographic Format, Authority Format, Holdings Format, Community Format, and Classification Data Format. Currently MARC 21 has been implemented successfully by The British Library, the European Institutions and the major library institutions in the United States, and Canada. MARC 21 is a result of the combination of the United States and Canadian MARC formats (USMARC and CAN/MARC). MARC21 is based on the NISO/ANSI standard Z39.2, which allows users of different software products to communicate with each other and to exchange data.

Resource Description and Access (RDA) - RDA stands for “Resource Description and Access” and is the title of the standard, that is the successor to AACR2. Resource Description and Access (RDA) is a standard for descriptive cataloging providing instructions and guidelines on formulating bibliographic data. Resource Description & Access (RDA) is a set of cataloging instructions based on FRBR and FRAD, for producing the description and name and title access points representing a resource. RDA offers libraries the potential to change significantly how bibliographic data is created and used. RDA is a standard for resource description and access designed for the digital world. It provides (i) A flexible framework for describing all resources (analog and digital) that is extensible for new types of material, (ii) Data that is readily adaptable to new and emerging database structures, (iii) Data that is compatible with existing records in online library catalogs. RDA is a package of data elements, guidelines, and instructions for creating library and cultural heritage resource metadata that are well-formed according to international models for user-focused linked data applications. RDA goes beyond earlier cataloging codes in that it provides guidelines on cataloging digital resources and places a stronger emphasis on helping users find, identify, select, and obtain the information they want. RDA also supports the clustering of bibliographic records in order to show relationships between works and their creators.

Statement of International Cataloguing Principles - The original Statement of Principles - commonly known as the “Paris Principles” - was approved by the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in 1961.  Its goal of serving as a basis for international standardization in cataloguing has certainly been achieved: most of the cataloguing codes that were developed worldwide since that time have followed the Principles strictly or at least to a high degree. More than fifty years later, having a common set of international cataloguing principles is still necessary as cataloguers and users around the world use online catalogues as search and discovery systems. At the beginning of the 21st century, IFLA produced a new statement of principles  (published in 2009) applicable to online library catalogues and beyond. The current version has been reviewed and updated in 2014 and 2015, and approved in 2016. The 2009 Statement of Principles replaced and explicitly broadened the scope of the Paris Principles from just textual resources to all types of resources, and from just the choice and form of entry to all aspects of bibliographic and authority data used in library catalogues. It included not only principles and objectives, but also guiding rules that should be included in cataloguing codes internationally, as well as guidance on search and retrieval capabilities. This 2016 edition takes into consideration new categories of users, the open access environment, the interoperability and the accessibility of data, features of discovery tools and the significant change of user behaviour in general.

Subject Cataloging - Subject Cataloging involves subject analysis of the resource and providing corresponding subject headings from a controlled vocabulary or subject heading list, such as Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), Medical Subject Headings (MESH) and assignment of classification numbers using schemes such as Library of Congress Classification (LCC) or Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC). Subject Heading is defined as the most specific word or group of words that captures the essence of the subject or one of the subjects of a book or other library material which is selected from a subject heading list containing the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) and assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. Classification or Library Classification is the process of arranging, grouping, coding, and organizing books and other library materials on shelves or entries of a catalog, bibliography, and index according to their subject in a systematic, logical, and helpful order by way of assigning them call numbers using a library classification system, so that users can find them as quickly and easily as possible. Use of classification enables library users to browse on shelves to find its materials, determines the place of a book and the shelf, and also collocates additional items on the same or related subjects. Classification also enables the library users to find out what documents the library has on a certain subject. The cataloger assigns a classification, or call number, in correlation with the subject headings.

Subject Heading - Subject Heading is defined as the most specific word or group of words that captures the essence of the subject or one of the subjects of a book or other library material (e.g. serial, sound recording, moving image, cartographic material, manuscript, computer file, e-resource etc.) which is selected from a subject heading list containing the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) and assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. Subject headings are also used in a bibliography and index. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonyms terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as the subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. In short, vocabulary control helps in overcoming problems that occur due to the natural language of the document’s subject. Hence, if vocabulary control is not exercised different indexers or the same indexer might use different terms for the same concept on different occasions for indexing the documents dealing with the same subject and also use a different set of terms for representing the same subject at the time of searching. This, in turn, would result in ‘mis-match’ and thus affect information retrieval. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject. A subject heading may be subdivided by the addition of form subdivisions, geographical subdivisions, chronological subdivisions, and topical subdivisions to add greater specificity or add a parenthetical qualifier to add semantic clarification. Two popular subject heading lists are Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and Sears List of Subject Headings.

Subject Heading List - Subject Heading List is the printed or published list of subject headings which may be produced from the subject authority file maintained by an organization or individual. Subject heading list contain the preferred subject access terms (controlled vocabulary) that are assigned as an added entry in the bibliographic record which works as an access point and enables the work to be searched and retrieved by subject from the library catalog database. The controlled vocabulary identifies synonyms terms and selects one preferred term among them to be used as subject heading. For homonyms, it explicitly identifies the multiple concepts expressed by that word or phrase. In short, vocabulary control helps in overcoming problems that occur due to natural language of the document’s subject. Hence, if vocabulary control is not exercised different indexers or the same indexer might use different terms for the same concept on different occasions for indexing the documents dealing with the same subject and also use a different set of terms for representing the same subject at the time of searching. This, in turn, would result in ‘mis-match’ and thus affect information retrieval. Cross-references are used with headings to direct the user from terms not used as headings to the term that is used, and from broader and related topics to the one chosen to represent a given subject.

Z39.50 - Z39.50 is a national and international standard defining a protocol for computer-to-computer information retrieval. It is a client-server, application layer communications protocol for searching and retrieving information from a database over a TCP/IP computer network. It is covered by ANSI/NISO standard Z39.50, and ISO standard 23950. The National Information Standards Organization of the United States (NISO) relating to libraries begin with Z39. To use Z39.50, you will need either special software or have an ILS with Z39.50 capabilities. Z39.50 acts like a “back door” into a library catalog. In order to download another library’s records, that library has to allow Z39.50 access to its catalog. If it does, though, there is no fee to pay the library providing the record.





Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris, France [Photo credit: Vincent Desjardins/Wikipedia] 




CATALOGING EXAMPLES OF BIBLIOGRAPHIC AND AUTHORITY RECORDS



Cataloging Example of a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC

Book title: Survey of Emerging Cataloging Practices: Use of RDA by Academic Libraries (coming soon)

Main article: 





Cataloging Example for a monograph (book): RDA, MARC 21, LCC, LCSH, DDC

Book title: The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation¹

Main article: Owens book "The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation" wins ALCTS Outstanding Publication Award

MARC FIELD TAGMARC 21 FIELDINDICATORSDATA RECORDED
00002941cam a2200361 i 4500
00120566576
00520190123121648.0
008Fixed-Length Data Elements180506s2018 mdua b 001 0 eng c
906Local Processing Data__|a 7 |b cbc |c orignew |d 1 |e ecip |f 20 |g y-gencatlg
925Local Selection Decision0_|a acquire |b 2 shelf copies |x policy default
955Local Tracking Information__|a LBSOR |e xk01 2018-07-31 to Dewey |w xb07 2018-08-01 |a xn11 2019-01-10 1 copy rec'd., to CIP ver. |f xk25 2019-01-23 to BCCD
010Library of Congress Control Number__|a 2018010715
020International Standard Book Number__|a 9781421426976 (softcover : acid-free paper)
020International Standard Book Number__|a 1421426978 (softocover : acid-free paper)
020International Standard Book Number__|z 9781421426983 (electronic)
020International Standard Book Number__|z 1421426986 (electronic)
040Cataloging Source__|a LBSOR/DLC |b eng |c LBSOR |e rda |d DLC
042Authentication Code__|a pcc
050Library of Congress Call Number00|a Z701.3.C65 |b O94 2018
082Dewey Decimal Classification Number00|a 025.8/4 |2 23
100Main Entry--Personal Name1_|a Owens, Trevor, |e author.
245Title Statement14|a The theory and craft of digital preservation / |c Trevor Owens.
264Production, Publication, Distribution, Manufacture, and Copyright Notice_1|a Baltimore : |b Johns Hopkins University Press, |c 2018.
300Physical Description__|a x, 226 pages : |b illustrations ; |c 22 cm
336Content Type__|a text |b txt |2 rdacontent
337Media Type__|a unmediated |b n |2 rdamedia
338Carrier Type__|a volume |b nc |2 rdacarrier
520Summary, etc.__|a "Among the public, there is a persistent belief that if something is on the Internet, it will be around forever. At the same time, warnings of an impending "digital dark age," where records of the recent past become completely lost or inaccessible, appear in the popular press. In The Theory and Craft of Digital Preservation, Trevor Owens offers a path to go beyond the hyperbole and the anxiety of the digital and establish a baseline for practice in this field. The first section of the book synthesizes work on the history of preservation in a range of areas (archives, manuscripts, recorded sound, etc.) and sets that history in dialogue with work in new media studies, platform studies, and media archeology. The later chapters build from this theoretical framework as a basis for an iterative process for the practice of doing digital preservation. While the book has a practical bent, it is not a how-to book that would quickly become outdated. It establishes and offers stages and processes for doing digital preservation, but it is not tied to particular tools, methods, or techniques. Instead, it is anchored in an understanding of the traditions of preservation and the nature of digital objects and media"-- |c Provided by publisher.
504Bibliography, etc. Note__a Includes bibliographical references (pages 209-220) and index.
505Formatted Contents Note0_|a Preservation's divergent lineages -- Understanding digital objects -- Challenges and opportunities of digital preservation -- The craft of digital preservation -- Preservation intent and collection development -- Managing copies and formats -- Arranging and describing digital objects -- Enabling multimodal access and use -- Conclusions: tools for looking forward.
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_0|a Digital preservation.
650Subject Added Entry - Topical Term_0|a Digital libraries |x Management.
985Local Record History__|a LBSORCIP |d 2018-07-03











CATALOGING EXAMPLES OF RELATIONSHIP DESIGNATORS AUTHORITY RECORDS




Examples of Relationship Designators in Authority Records²


Examples:
100
1

Billequo, Nicolas, $d active 1540-1541            
500
1

$w r $i Colleague: $a Colines, Simon de, $d 1480?-1546
670


Renouard, P. Répertoire des imprimeurs Parisiens, 1965: $b page 35 (Billequo (Nicolas); bookseller, active 1540-1541; address: Rue Moffetard, à Saint-Marcel; the four known volumes appearing under his name were printed by Simone de Colines)
100
1

Martin, George R. R. $t Sworn sword. $l Spanish
500
1

$w r $i Translator: $a Abascal, Jesús María
530

0
$w r $i Contained in (expression): $a Legends II (Anthology). $l Spanish
670


Leyendas, 2006: $b table of contents (Canción de hielo y fuego, La espada leal, by George R.R. Martin) title page (translated by Jesús Abascal)



Relationship Designators Only Used in 5XX Fields

Use relationship designators in 5XX fields only. When recording a relationship designator in 5XX field, record the designator using the $i and $w r technique (see DCM Z1, 5XX section).

Examples:
Agent to Agent
100
1

Morrison, Jim, $d 1943-1971
500
1

$w r $i Colleague: $a Manzarek, Ray
510
2

$w r $i Corporate body: $a Doors (Musical group)
670


Britannica Academic, viewed on April 13, 2017: $b Jim Morrison (member of the Doors along with Ray Mazarek)

Agent to Agent
110
2

Wesleyan University (Middletown, Conn.). $b East Asia Studies Program
510
2

$w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Wesleyan University (Middletown, Conn.)




Relationship Designators Not Used Within Authorized Access Points

Do not interpose relationship designators within authorized access points recorded in 5XX fields.

Example:
500
1

$w r $i Dramatized as (work): $a Asher, Sandy. $t Emma
NOT
500
1

$w r $i Dramatized as (work): $a Asher, Sandy, $e author. $t Emma

Relationships That Change Over Time

Most relationship designators are defined using the present tense, with the understanding that the designators can be used for relationships that took place in the past. Past and present relationships may be recorded in authority records at any time. If a relationship that no longer exists has been recorded in an authority record (e.g., because a person retired, or no longer holds a particular office), do not remove the relationship from the record.

Example:
Agent to Agent          
110
2

Gianni Versace S.p.A.
500
1

$w r $i Chief executive: $a Versace, Santo, $d 1944-
500
1

$w r $i Chief executive:  $a Cacciatori, Fabio Massimo, $d 1961-
500
1

$w r $i Chief executive: $a Di Risio, Giancarlo
500
1

$w r $i Chief executive:  $a Ferraris, Gian Giacomo
Reflects a succession of CEOs of the company

An affiliation can be recorded in the 373 field, with subfields $s and $t coding to show time period for which that affiliation existed (see DCM Z1, 373 section).

Example:
Agent to Agent
100
1

Sanders, Bernard
373


United States. Congress.  House $2 naf $s 1991 $t 2007
373


United States. Congress. Senate $2 naf $s 2007
510
1

$w r $i Corporate body: $a United States. $b Congress. $b House
510
1

$w r $i Corporate body: $a United States. $b Congress. $b Senate
Currently in United States Senate. Previously served in the United States House of Representatives.

Specificity

When selecting a relationship designator, choose the most specific designator that is appropriate.

Examples:
Agent to Agent
100
1

Tuckner, Paul
510
2

$w r $i Chief executive of: $a Grace Technology and Development (Firm)
NOT
510
2

$w r $i Officer of: $a Grace Technology and Development (Firm)
Tuckner‘s only position at Grace Technology and Development has been that of CEO


Work to Work
100
1

Dear, Nick. $t Persuasion
500
1

$w r $i Television screenplay based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion
NOT
500
1

$w r $i Based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion
NOT
500
1

$w r $i Screenplay based on (work): $a Austen, Jane, $d 1775-1817. $t Persuasion






Multiple Relationships with the Same Entity

Sometimes an entity has more than one relationship to another entity. When recording multiple relationships, record them in separate 5XX fields, each with a single relationship designator in a single subfield $i.

Examples:
Agent to Agent
110
2

Council of American Survey Research Organizations
510
2

$w r $i Founding corporate body: $a Field Research Corporation
510
2

$w r $i Corporate member: $a Field Research Corporation


Expression to Agent
130

0
Beowulf. $l English $s (Crawford)
500
1

$w r $i Translator: $a Crawford, D. H.
500
1

$w r $i Editor: $a Crawford, D. H.


Work to Agent
130

0
Speaking in tongues (Television program)
500
1

$w r $i Television director: $a Browne, Christene, $d 1965-
500
1

$w r $i Television producer: $a Browne, Christene, $d 1965-

Relationship That Is Unclear

Example:
Agent to Agent
110
2

Skidmore, Owings & Merrill
510
2

Crosstown Associates
667


Unable to determine nature of relationship with Crosstown Associates, n 87113575.

For instructions on using simple see-also references and 667 notes when an earlier name has been resumed, see LC-PCC PS for 32.1.1.3, Early Name Resumed.

Relationship That Cannot Be Described Using a Relationship Designator


Examples:
Agent to Agent
100
1

Wiggin, Ender $c (Fictitious character)
500
1

Card, Orson Scott
678
0

Ender Wiggin is the principal character in several novels and stories by Orson Scott Card, whose brilliant military strategy saves the human race from the attack of an alien race called the Formics.


Place to Place
151


Saint Barthelemy
551


France
678
1

Saint Barthelemy became an overseas collectivity of France in 2007.






Reciprocal Relationships

Example:
Person to Corporate Body
100
1

Warren, Whitney, $d 1864-1943
510
2

$w r $i Founded corporate body of person: $a Warren & Wetmore


Reciprocal Relationship – Corporate Body to Person
110
2

Warren & Wetmore
500
1

$w r $i Founder: $a Wetmore, Charles D., $d 1867-1941
500
1

$w r $i Founder: $a Warren, Whitney, $d 1864-1943

However, avoid recording reciprocal relationship links when there are potentially a large number of entities to be related.

Example:
Person to Corporate Body
100
1

Boxer, Barbara
510
2

$w r $i Corporate body: $a Democratic Party (U.S.)
Reciprocal relationship between Boxer and the Democratic Party would not be made in the record for Democratic Party (U.S.) because of the large number of members of the Democratic Party

When relating agents and works, it is often sufficient to record the relationship only on the authority record for the work because agents may have relationships to many works.



Example:
Work to Agent         
130

0
Schindler’s list (Motion picture)
500
1

$w r $i Film director: $a Spielberg, Steven, $d 1946- 
Stephen Spielberg has directed and/or produced dozens of motion pictures.


Real and Alternate Identities

See DCM Z1, 500 section, for instructions when only two name authority records are involved.  See DCM Z1 663 section, when more than two name authority records are involved. 
See also the FAQ - LC/PCC RDA Practice for Creating NARs for Persons Who Use Pseudonyms for treatment of the reciprocals.






Specific Cases

Corporate Bodies


Examples:
Predecessor
110
2

AcademiWales
510
2

$w r $i Predecessor: $a Public Service Management Wales (Program)


Reciprocal Relationship--Successor
110
2

Public Service Management Wales (Program)
510
2

$w r $i Successor: $a AcademiWales


Product of Split
110
2

Estes & Lauriat
510
2

$w r $i Product of split: $a Charles E. Lauriat Co.
510
2

$w r $i Product of split: $a Dana Estes & Company


Reciprocal Relationship—Predecessor of Split
110
2

Charles E. Lauriat Co.
510
2

$w r $i Predecessor of split: $a Estes & Lauriat


Reciprocal Relationship—Predecessor of Split
110
2

Dana Estes & Company
510
2

$w r $i Predecessor of split: $a Estes & Lauriat

Examples:
Existing NAR—Later Name
110
2

American Architectural Foundation
510
2

$w a $a American Institute of Architects Foundation


Updated to Show Relationship Designator
110
2

American Architectural Foundation
510
2

$w r $i Predecessor: $a American Institute of Architects Foundation


Existing NAR—Earlier Name
110
2

American Institute of Architects Foundation
510
2

$w b $a American Architectural Foundation


Updated to Show Relationship Designator
110
2

American Institute of Architects Foundation
510
2

$w r $i Successor: $a American Architectural Foundation


Examples:
110
2

Field Research Corporation
510
2

$w r $i Founded corporate body of corporate body: $a Council of American Survey Research Organizations

111
2

World Conference on International Telecommunications $d (2012 : $c Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
510
2

$w r $i Sponsoring corporate body: $a International Telecommunication Union

 

Hierarchical Relationships for Related Corporate Bodies


Examples:
110
2

Sibley Music Library
510
2

$w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Eastman School of Music
The Eastman School of Music is the immediate superior body to Sibley Music Library. The superior body does not appear in the authorized access point.


110
2

British Broadcasting Corporation. $b Broadcasting Research Department
510
2

$w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a British Broadcasting Corporation
The British Broadcasting Corporation is the immediate superior body to Broadcasting Research Department. The superior body appears in the authorized access point.


Example:
110
2

Cooper-Hewitt Museum
510
2

$w r $i Hierarchical superior: $a Smithsonian Institution
BUT NOT ALSO
110
2

Smithsonian Institution
510
2

$w r $i Hierarchical subordinate: $a Cooper-Hewitt Museum

 

Chronological relationships

Family Relationships   
Use relationship designators from Appendix K.3.2 to relate families descended from other families.

Example:
Descendant Family of
100
3

Windsor (Royal house : $d 1918- : $c Great Britain)
500
3

$w r $i Descendant family of: $a Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Royal house : $d 1840-1918 : $c Great Britain)


Reciprocal Relationship—Descendant Family
100
3

Saxe-Coburg-Gotha (Royal house : $d 1840-1918 : $c Great Britain)
500
3

$w r $i Descendant family: $a Windsor (Royal house : $d 1918- : $c Great Britain)
Use relationship designators from K.3 to record relationships between families and other types of agents.

Example:
100
1

Benson, Phoebe, $d 1820-1904
500
3

$w r $i Descendants: $a Benson (Family : $d 1844- : $g Benson, Richard, 1816-1895) 

If there is no appropriate relationship designator, use simple see-also references (see Guideline 7).





Works and Expressions

Works and Expressions

Relating Works and Expressions to Agents


Examples: Work to Creator(s)
Work to Agent
100
1

Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Return of the king
500
1

$w r $i Author: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973
Relationship between a work and its creator.


Work to Agent
100
0

Christo, $d 1935- $t Wrapped Reichstag
500
1

$w r $i Artist: $a Jeanne-Claude, $d 1935-2009
500
0

$w r $i Artist: $a Christo, $d 1935
Collaborative work created by Christo and Jeanne-Claude.

Examples: Work to Other Associated Agent
Work to Agent
130

0
Studies in economics (Eugene, Or.)
510
2

$w r $i Issuing body: $a University of Oregon. $b Bureau of Business and Economic Research

Relationships between expressions and agents may also be recorded using an appropriate relationship designator from RDA Appendix I in a name authority record for the expression.

Examples: Expression to Agent
Expression to Agent
100
1

Rowling, J. K. $t Harry Potter and the prisoner of Azkaban $s (Kay)
500
1

$w r $i Illustrator: $a Kay, Jim $c (Illustrator)


Expression to Agent
130

0
Bible. $l German. $s Luther. $f 1681
500
1

$w r $i Translator: $a Luther, Martin, $d 1483-1546


Expression to Agent
130

0
Good King Wenceslas; $o arranged $s (McDonald)
500
1

$w r $i Arranger of music: $a McDonald, Marshall

When recording relationships between a work/expression and multiple agents, record each agent in a separate 5XX field.

Examples: Work or Expression to Agents
Work to Agent
100
1

Humphrey, Doris, $d 1895-1958. $t New dance
500
1

$w r $i Choreographer: $a Humphrey, Doris, $d 1895-1958
500
1

$w r $i Choreographer: $a Weidman, Charles
Collaborative work created by Humphry and Weidman.


Work to Agent
100
1

Tamaki, Mariko. $t This one summer
500
1

$w r $i Author: $a Tamaki, Mariko
500
1

$w r $i Artist: $a Tamaki, Jillian, $d 1980-
Collaborative work created by Mariko and Jillian Tamaki.


Expression to Agent
100
1

Gide, Charles, $d 1847-1932. $t Histoire des doctrines économiques $s (Sixième édition). $f 2000
500
1

$w r $i Editor: $a Rist, Charles, $d 1874-1955
500
1

$w r $i Writer of introduction: $a Cot, Annie L.
500
1

$w r $i Writer of introduction: $a Lallement, Jérôme

Although relationships designators may be used with authorized access points for places in bibliographic records, they may not be recorded in name authority records to relate a work/expression and place.

Example:
Bibliographic Record
110
1

Brazil, $e enacting jurisdiction.
240
1
0
Constituição (1967)
245
1
0
Constituição da Républica Federativa do Brasil.


Name Authority Record
110
1

Brazil. $t Constituição (1967)
No 5XX with a relationship designator is given because a relationship designator cannot be recorded in a 551 field according to the 551 field instruction sheet in DCM Z1 (see Appendix for more information).




Relating Works/Expressions to Other Works/Expressions

Use relationship designators from Appendix J to record relationships between works/expressions and other related works/expressions.

Examples:
Work to Work
100
1

Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Return of the king
500
1

$w r $i Sequel to: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Two towers
500
1

$w r $i In series: $a Tolkien, J. R. R. $q (John Ronald Reuel), $d 1892-1973. $t Lord of the rings
530

0
$w r $i Adapted as motion picture (work): $a Lord of the rings, the return of the king (Motion picture)

Expression to Work
130

0
Gesta Romanorum. $l English
530

0
$w r $i Translation of: $a Gesta Romanorum

Sequential Series Relationships
For sequential relationships between two series, always record the reciprocal relationship in the corresponding record.

Example:
Work to Work
130

0
Wiley-Blackwell companions to art history
530

0
$w r $i Continuation of (work): $a Blackwell companions to art history


Work to Work—Reciprocal Relationship
130

0
Blackwell companions to art history
530

0
$w r $i Continued by (work): $a Wiley-Blackwell companions to art history

 




Multiple Entities and Relationships in one Name Authority Record


Examples:
Agent to Expression and Work to Expression
100
1

Galilei, Galileo, $d 1564-1642. $ Dialogo dei massimi sistemi. $l English $s (Finocchiaro)
500
1

$w r $i Translator: $a Finocchiaro, Maurice A., $d 1942-
500
1

$w r $i Abridger: $a Finocchiaro, Maurice A., $d 1942-
500
1

$w r $i Abridgement of (work): $a Galilei, Galileo, $d 1564-1642. $t Dialogo dei massimi sistemi


Αgent to Expression and Expression to Expression
100
0

Aeschylus. $t Oresteia. $l English $s (Slavitt)
500
1

$w r $i Editor: $a Slavitt, David R., $d 1935-
500
1

$w r $i Translator: $a Slavitt, David R., $d 1935-
500
0

$w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Agamemnon. $l English $s (Slavitt)
500
0

$w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Choephori. $l English $s (Slavitt)
500
0

$w r $i Container of (expression): $a Aeschylus. $t Eumenides. $l English $s (Slavitt)






Subjects

Subject Relationships


Examples:
100
0

Eutocius, $c of Ascalon. $t Commentarius in libros de planorum aequilibriis
500
0

$w r $i Commentary on (work): $a Archimedes. $t De planorum aequilibriis


130

0
Textes d’auteurs grecs et latins relatifs à l’Extrême-Orient
500
1

$w r $i Commentary in (work): $a Sheldon, John $c (Research fellow). $t Commentary on George Coedès Texts of Greek and Latin authors on the Far East


Example:
Bibliographic Record
245
0
0
KJV 400 : $b the legacy & impact of the King James Version.
630
0
0
Bible. $l English $x Versions $x Authorized.


Name Authority Record
130

0
KJV 400
530

0
$w r $i Description of (expression): $a Bible. $l English. $s Authorized







Cambridge University Library [Photo credit: University of Cambridge]



MARC BIBLIOGRAPHIC AND RDA INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES

















MARC AUTHORITY AND RDA INSTRUCTIONS AND EXAMPLES





























REFERENCES

1. Library of Congress Catalog https://lccn.loc.gov/2018010715 

2. PCC Guidelines for the Application of Relationship Designators in NACO Authority Records. Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov (accessed February 10, 2019). https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/documents/OpCo-2016/PCCSCSSCTTFAuthRDsGuidelinesFinal20160412b.docx

3. RDA Toolkit. https://www.rdatoolkit.org/






SEE ALSO



FEEDBACK 
  • Help us improve this article! Contact us with your feedback. You can use the comments section below, or reach us on social media.



Post a Comment

0 Comments