Go to:
Discussion
Online Doc
File
Poll
Event
Meeting Request
Suggestion
Mary Larsgaard's picture

Questions and problems with creating bibliographic records for cartographic resources using RDA

Please post to this discussion questions and problems that arise as you create bibliographic records for cartographic resources using RDA.

Christopher Winters (non-member)'s picture

The University of Chicago’s Map Collection’s modest cataloging effort has mostly switched to RDA since October 1. (Background: the head of the University of Chicago Library’s Cataloging Department, Chris Cronin, has been involved in the development of RDA and much of his Department’s original cataloging work has been in RDA since the beginning of the current tesing phase. The Map Collection, in theory, works independently of the Cataloging Department, but there was no reason not to conform to local practice in this area.) You can generate a list of the records we’ve created by doing the search: dt="map" and dx:rda and li:cgu in WorldCat or Connexion. (The records for atlases were done by our Cataloging Department.)

Comments on any of these records are welcome.

I notice that most other academic libraries have been a little slower to contribute RDA records to OCLC, so I thought I’d share a couple of comments in the hope of generating a discussion.

Perhaps I’m missing something pretty basic, but most of the changes in record-creation required by RDA seem fairly trivial and quite reasonable, e.g., no longer abbreviating.

We _have_ had problems in one area: the addition of relationship designators. (I don’t think relationship designators are "core" parts of RDA records, but U of C Cataloging has been using them, and I thought we should too.) The problem is that the available relationship designators do not at all capture many of the functions of the creators of cartographic materials. For example, many map records have a 110 or 710 for the publisher, but "publisher" is not a legal relationship designator. Sometimes "cartographer" or "issuing body" are appropriate substitutes, but sometimes they’re not. Many map records also add 7xx fields for data creators or data sources, but there seems to be no way to do this with the current relationship designators. You can see the problem in OCLC 668106748. The Port of London Authority is probably both the cartographer and the issuing body (you have to choose only one). Cook, Hammond & Kell is the publisher or perhaps printer (part of the problem here is MARC's insistence on making a distinction that isn't always clear for cartographic materials), and this can’t be expressed with relationshiop designators; "issuing body" is really not right. And the Hydrographic Office and Ordnance Survey are sources of data (calling them "surveyors" is somewhat laughable).

I’ve made this same point in filling out the surveys, but I don’t expect anything will happen very quickly.

Comments and ideas are welcome.

Chris

Christopher Winters
Bibliographer for Anthropology, Geography, and Map
University of Chicago Library

Mary Larsgaard's picture

Many thanks, Chris! i posted a list of about 30 OCLC #s on the discussion topic for records for manifestation-level records.

Glad to read you've noted relatively few difficulties. The one you mentioned isn't a problem I'd figured out - I was still mulling over matters such as creating uniform-titles for work- and expression level records.

Mary Larsgaard's picture

Many thanks, Chris! i posted a list of about 30 OCLC #s on the discussion topic for records for manifestation-level records.

Glad to read you've noted relatively few difficulties. The one you mentioned isn't a problem I'd figured out - I was still mulling over matters such as creating uniform-titles for work- and expression level records.

Christopher Winters (non-member)'s picture

Just thought I should say that, since I posted the message a couple of days ago, I've learned that it's ok to have two relationship designators after an author entry. At least I think it is (there may not be examples of this in the RDA Toolkit, but the description of relationship designators says "one or more").

Chris Winters