Cataloging Futures

ALA 2007 preconference: What they don't teach in library school

I've been sick all weekend, but I did finally renew my ALA membership and will be going to the midwinter conference. I'll try to post the meetings I hope to attend. It would be great to meet and have some future of cataloging conversations. (Just look for a lady with very short gray hair looking clueless--I'm not a regular ALA attender.)

This weekend, I watched all but 3 of the webcasts from this ALCTS/CETRC preconference, What They Don't Teach in Library School: Competencies, Education, and Employer Expectations for a Career in Cataloging. These webcasts are great! Definitely take the time to watch them. I took away some excellent cataloging management ideas.

On June 22, 2007, librarians from across the United States and Canada gathered in Washington, D.C. during ALA Annual to discuss the future of cataloging at a preconference (PDF; 23K) sponsored by the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, Committee on Education, Training & Recruitment for Cataloging (ALCTS/CETRC), the Library of Congress and the Catholic University of America.

• Biographies of the speakers (PDF; 24K)
• Presentation by James F. Brennan, Ph.D., the provost of Catholic University at the beginning of the preconference (PDF; 23K)
• Webcasts and presentations of the speakers:
  • Matthew Beacom: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • Karen Calhoun: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • J. Randolph Call: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • Sylvia D. Hall-Ellis: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • Janet Swan Hill: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • Brian E.C. Schottlaender: Webcast - PowerPoint
  • Beacher Wiggins: Webcast - Preconference Paper (PDF; 141K)

ALA 2007: David Bade's Paper

David Bade delivered this paper, I Know Where I Am Going, Do You?, at the 2007 American Library Association Annual Conference for an ALCTS forum on continuing resources (a.k.a., serials). Some quotes:

"While it may seem evident enough that there is only one way to describe such things as pagination in a book, the key issue is rather that both what information one includes or excludes (e.g. pagination) and the form in which that information is recorded are always dependent upon the purposes for which it is recorded. In an environment of automated data exchange, either we have to be satisfied with whatever we do and do not get, no matter for whom or for what purposes it was created, or we have to have a human being examine, evaluate and adapt that information to our particular purposes."

"Should continuing resources cataloging standards change to accommodate greater use of non-library data? Again, the wrong question. Let us ask instead: What is the best way in which we can use non-library data to accomplish our goals? The problem with the original question is that the assumption is that non-library data fits the library's needs and purposes and it is the library that needs to change, not the data."

ALA 2007: Metadata Presentations

Over on the LITA Blog, Rebecca Guenther provides information about an ALA Annual 2007 program that was sponsored by the LITA Standards Interest Group, Using Metadata Standards in Digital Libraries: implementing METS, MODS, PREMIS and MIX:

• Rebecca Guenther, Library of Congress: Using Metadata Standards in Digital Libraries: Introduction to METS, MODS, PREMIS and MIX
• Morgan Cundiff, Library of Congress: Using <METS> and <MODS> to Create XML Standards-based Digital Library Applications
• Nathan Trail, Library of Congress: How to Build, Display and Find METS Objects
• Brian Tingle, California Digital Library: Use of METS in CDL Digital Special Collections
• Sarah Shreeves, University of Illinois Urbana/Champaign: Creating Rich Shareable Metadata: the DLF Aquifer MODS implementation guidelines
• Tom Habing, University of Illinois Urbana/Champaign: METS, MODS and PREMIS, Oh My! : Integrating Digital Library Standards for Interoperability and Preservation
• Tod Olson, University of Chicago: MODS as Data Hub

Thoughts on ALA's RDA Update Forum + New RDA Draft Available

I enjoyed reading Karen Coyle's blogging of the RDA Update Forum held yesterday at the ALA Annual Conference. Most interesting quotes:

"John Attig is the new ALA representative to the JSC. John gave the clearest vision of RDA that I've ever heard, linking RDA chapters directly to FRBR user tasks and stating clearly that RDA is intended to be a set of data elements plus a community application profile. He also talked about traditional cataloging details, like uniform titles and headings for the Bible, that are being discussed by the RDA members. His talk showed that the issues that come up in library cataloging are essentially unchanged, although the structure that records those decisions may be significantly different. One will still ponder access points, primary and not, and struggle with all of the nitty gritty details. [emphasis mine] John does an excellent job of marrying metadata and cataloging -- the data and the activity of making decisions about the data."

"However, after all of this positive reporting, the few questions that we had time for showed that there is still an undercurrent (or maybe a good-sized wave) of discontent within the cataloging community. Some of this might be seen as obsessing on the part of catalogers (the obligatory complaining about ISBD punctuation), but not all. An attendee sitting near me stood up and stated that RDA, as currently in draft, is not usable as cataloging instructions. [emphasis mine] After we broke up, others came up to him to thank him for voicing what they, too, feel. Even members of the RDA process have said similar things off record."

Here's what I take from this:

• While the structure/framework of RDA will be different from AACR2, the fundamental cataloging issues will remain. This makes sense. Certain aspects of bibliographic description and authority control are present whether or not the resources you're cataloging are digital or print.
• The current drafts of RDA aren't usable as a new content standard/cataloging code.
• The process of RDA development is moving forward nonetheless.
• So, since RDA is still in draft (and new drafts are scheduled to come out) there's still opportunity for the cataloging community to have a voice in the process. If we don't like the product let's say so!
• By the way, a new RDA draft was just released. It's for Part A, Chapters 6-7 (revised) [PDF]. The deadline for comments is September 17, 2007.