LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for ARLIS-L Archives


ARLIS-L Archives

ARLIS-L Archives


ARLIS-L@LSV.ARLISNA.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARLIS-L Home

ARLIS-L Home

ARLIS-L  May 2008

ARLIS-L May 2008

Subject:

FW: Letter from Deanna Marcum and Joint Statement on RDA

From:

Sherman Clarke <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Sherman Clarke <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 6 May 2008 16:06:22 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (82 lines)

FORWARDED MESSAGE FROM DEANNA MARCUM, LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW CATALOGING RULES

May 1, 2008

Dear Colleagues,

The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control submitted its final report, On the Record , to me on January 9, 2008. I have distributed the document to three groups within the Library of Congress for analysis and comment. I expect to respond formally to the report in early June.

On the Record contains more than one hundred recommendations aimed at the Library of Congress, other specific organizations and entities, and to the broader library community. In the words of the members of the Working Group, they envision "a future for bibliographic control that will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based...change will happen quickly, and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static." The group urged the readers of the report to view it as a " 'call to action' that informs and broadens participation in discussion and debate, conveys a sense of urgency, stimulates collaboration, and catalyzes thoughtful and deliberative action." The many recommendations suggest ways in which the necessary systemic change can take place.

When the Library of Congress issues its response, we will be focusing on how it will position itself to work in this new, networked, and collaborative environment, not simply on single recommendations. We recognize that any cataloging code (AACR2 or the proposed Resource Description and Access--RDA) is but a part of this environment. 

It may seem counterintuitive that we issue a joint statement with our colleagues from the National Agricultural Library and the National Library of Medicine on RDA before we issue a full response to On the Record , but we do so because the international Joint Steering Committee and the Committee of Principals continue their work, and because so many
librarians are asking about the national libraries' plans to implement the proposed code.

We are pleased to report that we three libraries have worked together to establish an approach to the consideration of RDA in the attached joint statement.

We ask that you bear in mind that it is the entire bibliographic system that needs to be considered and reworked, and the cataloging code is only one small piece of the work that lies ahead.

Sincerely,

Deanna B. Marcum
Associate Librarian for Library Services
The Library of Congress


Joint Statement of the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Agricultural Library on Resource Description and Access

May 1, 2008

Leaders of the Library of Congress (LC), the National Library of Medicine (NLM), and the National Agricultural Library (NAL) met on March 10, 2008 to discuss the recommendation from On the Record: the Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control to suspend work on RDA.

The group agreed that the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA's work on Resource Description and Access (RDA) is an important international initiative that has been underway for several years and is one that requires continued collaboration with our international partners who have joined with the United States in a global initiative to update bibliographic practices to make the library resources more accessible and useful to users. The participants also agreed that their
decisions whether or not to implement this new standard must be made jointly. Further, participants agreed that LC, NLM, and NAL have collective leadership responsibilities to assist the U.S. library and information community to remain relevant and vital in an increasingly digital future. Key to this role is providing a broad assessment and commitment to RDA if they believe this standard will further national strategic goals for improved bibliographic control and access. 

Colleagues from NLM and NAL are most concerned that a systematic review of RDA has not yet been possible and, given the potential magnitude and broad impact of the changes, such a review is essential. While draft chapters of RDA have been available, a clear, concise, and cohesive understanding of the overall impact of the entire standard is needed. Until the completion of the rules and the availability of the RDA online tool, reviewers will not be able fully to assess their impact on: 

--Description, access, and navigation practices for a broad array of users and types of materials

--Current and future electronic carriers and information management systems to support RDA goals

--Estimated costs for implementation and maintenance during a time of flat, even reduced, budgets 

The three national libraries agreed on the following approach: First, we jointly commit to further development and completion of RDA. Second, following its completion, a decision to implement the rules will be based upon the positive evaluation of RDA's utility within the library and information environment, and criteria reflecting the technical, operational, and financial implications of the new code. This will include an articulation of the business case for RDA, including benefits to libraries and end users and cost analyses for retraining staff and re-engineering cataloging processes.

Together, we will:

--Jointly develop milestones for evaluating how we will implement RDA

--Conduct tests of RDA that determine if each milestone has been reached; paying particular attention to the benefits and costs of implementation

--Widely distribute analyses of benefits and costs for review by the U.S. library community

--Consult with the vendor and bibliographic utility communities to address their concerns about RDA

Included among the tests that will be developed to assist in formulating implementation decisions:

--Usability testing with cataloging staff, i.e. librarians and technicians, experienced and newer staff from the three national
libraries in consultation with representatives from the U.S. library community (including OCLC and library vendors) about its participation in the process

--Testing of records for a broad array of materials created during usability studies to determine compatibility with existing record sets and ensuring records are usable and understandable for our end users

--Testing the feasibility of integrating this new cataloging standard into all relevant technology systems

The three institutions agreed that these steps will be followed and, if there is a decision to implement RDA, that the implementation would not occur before the end of 2009. 

The collective resolve is to complete the development of RDA, to conduct appropriate tests that will inform and involve the broader U.S. library community as to the utility of the code, and to ensure a product that is useful, usable, and cost effective. The Library of Congress will continue to work with its international colleagues on the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA and the Committee of Principals and keep them apprised of the evaluation progress and outcomes as the three national libraries, representing their constituents, undertake the tests outlined above.

-----------------------------------

Forwarded by Sherman Clarke, New York University Libraries - [log in to unmask] -- sorry for the duplication &c &c

__________________________________________________________________
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask]
For information about joining ARLIS/NA see:
        http://www.arlisna.org/join.html
Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc)
        to [log in to unmask]
ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance:
       http://lsv.uky.edu/archives/arlis-l.html
Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LSV.ARLISNA.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager