Why the LRM? Started with FRBR, then FRAD, followed by FRSAD
There were conflicts among the three models, such as over "name" which was an attribute in FRBR and an entity in FRDA. Subjects were treated differently. Differences have been harmonized in LRM
LRM is abstract, still an entity relationship model, still has many of the same things we saw in the original models (FRBR, …)
LRM simplifies. Much of FRAD is gone in LRM. LRM eliminates administrative focus, refocusing on the user.
Changes in LRM
The user tasks have been slightly redefined. Explore has been added. Justify and Contextualize have been removed
Users are now just normal people--catalogers and librarians have been removed from the scope
Entities have been changed into 3 hierarchical tiers
Res is now the top level. The third level contains Person and Collective agent, which are subentities of Agent. All the other entities are subentities of Res in the second level.
Former group 2 entites are now part of the superclass Agent. Place is now an entity of its own. Nomen is new and is the name or label that applies to a given entity.
Attributes and Relationships have also changed. The hierarchy allows for trickling down of meaning. That is, what is true for Agent is also true for the subentities Person and Collective agent. More emphasis on relationships and less concern about attributes. Current RDA has a lot of attributes about the manifestation and expression, which are reduced in LRM in favor of relationships.
LRM presents a much smaller list of attributes. It doesn't mean you cannot describe them, they are simply not presented. Many attributes have been replaced with relationships. Form of expression is now Category.
LRM identifies 36 relationships. Retains the high level FRBR relationships. Some relationships have been deprecated others have been redefined. Under FRBR only a work can be created. In LRM the Expression and the Manifestation can now be created as well.
In FRBR a Work can have a subject either from Group 3 and/or 2. In the LRM a Work has a Res as a subject.
Relationships have all been defined. For example a Res is associated with a Res. A Res has an appellation (name). Will continue to see whole-part relationships.
Person has been redefined to be only a person who lived. This has repercussions for fictitious characters, etc. The fictitious character is then a nomen for a real person.
It is aligning with LRM, to move toward a more linked data structure, greater internationalisation, and accommodate practice outside of Anglo/Western concepts.
What does this all mean? We are moving into a content standard that is no longer rules. I will not tell us what to do. It is a system that will provide options and someone will have to decide what those options shall be, which will be called Application Profile.
Who will create these Application Profiles? It may be a hot potato that is passed around.
Structure. There are 13 entries are the focal points (chapters) with 1700+ elements each with its own page .
There are more work related elements than manifestation elements.
New navigation, but instruction numbers are gone but the toolkit will generate a random citation number that can be used to retrieve a specific instruction/element.
Eventually there will be a hierarchy browser.
There is no more core--everything is optional. Recording methods are optional. Each data element will have to be cited as to source/provenance. Much of this will be set forth and dictated by the application profile.
A lively discussion followed the presentation. Attendees had concerns about Revised RDA and how it would be applied in practice. There was a discussion about who would create the application profile(s) (LC/PCC? Subject Communities? Individual libraries?), and how much responsibility would be placed on individual libraries to develop policy. This could be a challenge for smaller libraries. Attendees also were concerned about having no set instructions, and how that would affect the creation of standard bibliographic records. Educators shared similar concerns, especially how Revised RDA will affect the teaching and learning of cataloging.
225 N Michigan Ave, Suite 1300 | Chicago, IL | 60601 | USA
Request a New Community