Resource Description and Access: It’s Really Not So Bad

Blythe, Kurt; Gunther, Wanda K.; Spurgin, Kristina M.

doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2013.07.008

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Blythe gives special attention to electronic integrating resources while Bross focuses on CONSER practice. 48 Culbertson explains the Program for Cooperative Cataloging's (PCC) decision to go against both AACR2 and RDA principles and recommend provider-neutral records for resources that are available on multiple platforms. 49 The cataloging literature focuses on metadata as much as on traditional cataloging.…”

Section: Bibliographic Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Promise of the Future: A Review of the Serials Literature, 2012–13

Sullenger¹

2016

LRTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Bibliographic Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Promise of the Future: A Review of the Serials Literature, 2012–13

Sullenger¹

2016

LRTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Cronin (2011) looked at the impact of RDA on ILS systems and noted that libraries needed to decide how to handle the integration of RDA and AACR2 records, including whether to continue the display of the GMD and whether to display the CMC fields so that RDA records would be integrated with AACR2 records. Blythe, Gunther, and Spurgin (2013) noted that the CMC fields were not useful if they were not on every record in the database because programming based on the GMD would not find the RDA records that lacked the GMD and programming based on the RDA fields would not find AACR2 records unless the CMCs were added. Understanding the importance of having CMCs on every record in the database, OCLC (2013) issued a policy statement endorsing the creation of hybrid records through the addition of the CMCs to AACR2 records.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Resource Description Committee decided that CMCs offered enough of an advantage in solving the existing format display issues described above that we would use them for that purpose. However, in order to use the CMC fields, we needed to add them to every record in the database, not just the newer RDA ones, since those records without these fields would not have their format information included (Blythe et al, 2013;OCLC, 2013). Our database management specialist took over a year to retrofit the AACR2 records in our database to carry the CMC fields through a series of global edits.…”

Section: Programming Using the Cmcs At Auburn University Librariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Keep it Simple: Using RDA's Content, Media, and Carrier Type Fields to Simplify Format Display Issues

Caudle

Schmitz

2014

Journal of Library Metadata

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auburn University Libraries decided to use Resource Description and Access's (RDA's) content, media, and carrier (CMC) fields to display format information in our VuFind catalog in hopes of solving the granularity and ambiguity problems encountered under Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, second edition (AACR2) and the scattering of format information throughout the MAchineReadable Cataloging record. After adding the CMCs to every record in the catalog and writing preliminary code, we have found that RDA, while simpler, still lacks the granularity we need and does not handle new or complex formats as easily as its designers claim.

show abstract

“…This presentation serves as a follow-up to a Resource Description and Access (RDA) presentation at the 22nd conference covered in Blythe, Gunther, and Spurgin (2013). This year, the presenters' aims were twofold: to keep serialists informed about the continuing development of RDA and to share the implementation insights from NCSU Libraries' experience training for and implementing RDA as a pilot institution in 2010.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%