[DCRM-L] Review of RDA proposal

[Schneider, Nina]

Amy

Does recommendation #3 eliminate the alternative for transcription? Or does it just mean that if you are following the alternatives (RDA 1.7), then these are the options? The list of examples on page 5 is just a bit confusing. Will we have to note "transcription source" is title page if this goes through?

Thanks,
Nina

From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On Behalf Of Tims, Amy
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2016 12:59 PM
To: dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu
Subject: [DCRM-L] Review of RDA proposal

Hello, all-

It's August, and Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA) is again evaluating and approving responses to other constituencies' proposals to the RDA Steering Committee (RSC). These proposals will be discussed at the RSC meeting in Frankfort, Germany at Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, Nov. 7-11.

This year, the rare materials community has two avenues of feedback to the RSC: the CC:DA, where the RBMS liaison gives input into the ALA-authored responses to proposals, and the RSC Rare Materials Working Group. I'm succeeding Matthew Haugen as RBMS liaison; Francis Lapka is the chair of the Rare Materials WG.

Among current proposals to the RSC, Francis and I believe that the RSC/Technical WG/1, RDA models for provenance data (http://alcts.ala.org/ccdablog/?p=2973), is of particular interest to the rare materials community, and we welcome comments and discussion. We encourage folks to review pages 3-7 of the report (if not the entirety), which includes the following recommendations:

-          Recommendation 2: Generalize the scope of application of cataloguer's note and source consulted to any RDA element and provide contextual guidance on applicability to specific elements. [This change would provide cataloguer's note and source consulted for Manifestations and Items.]

-          Recommendation 3: Consider creating the meta-elements transcription note, transcription source, and transcription rules when introducing separate elements for transcriptions. [This change could have a significant impact on how - or at least where - notes on transcriptions are recorded. It could also enable a granular method for specifying the transcription rules used in any transcribed statement.]

-          Recommendation 4: Develop general guidance on recording provenance data and using RDA meta-elements. [These changes would provide an RDA mechanism for recording information about the creator, date, and language of cataloging. There's also interesting discussion of "RDA data sets."]

Your comments will inform the reply of the ALA Representative to the RSC and the Rare Materials Working Group.

The window for comment for CC:DA is short; therefore, I ask that you reply by the end of the day on Tuesday, August 30. However, if you miss this window or have insight, opinions, or concerns after this date, please continue to discuss - the Rare Materials WG has a longer period to formulate their reply.

Thank you,
Amy and Francis


Amy Tims
Project Cataloger
American Antiquarian Society
185 Salisbury Street
Worcester, Massachusetts 01609-1634
atims at mwa.org<mailto:atims at mwa.org>

Francis Lapka  *  Catalog Librarian
Dept. of Rare Books and Manuscripts
Yale Center for British Art
203.432.9672  *  francis.lapka at yale.edu<mailto:francis.lapka at yale.edu>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20160829/f98c6958/attachment.html>