The CC:DA chair reported that the ad hoc group on FRBR terminology is being reconvened as a task force. Email discussions are being expanded to include liaisons as well as committee members.
Barbara Tillett distributed a report on cataloging activities at LC. Judy Mansfield has been appointed acting director of cataloging while Beacher Wiggins is acting associate librarian for Library Services (following Winston Tabb’s retirement). Mansfield’s focus will be on filling the 44 cataloging vacancies authorized in 2002. The budget for this year has not yet been approved but LC expects significant cuts. The 2002 revised version of AACR2 is now available and LC implemented the changes in December. LC implemented KBP, Islamic law in January. The P schedules in ClassWeb have been reconfigured so that the tables work better. The report includes statistics on items cataloged and processed, cf. the 2002 annual report for numbers and other information at http://www.loc.gov/catdir/catdirfy02.html
Tillett announced that LC has cataloged a significant number of resources in the American Memory project. She suggested that libraries might want to use the records in their opacs since the resources are available freely on the internet.
LC has not implemented the 148, 448 and 548 fields for chronological data in the authority format. The British Library won’t be able to implement the X48 fields until 2004 and LC will probably delay implementation to be in sync. It is still not possible to retrieve authority records via Z39.50 and they are no closer to providing this access.
Tillett spoke about the availability of authority records from the Bibliothèque nationale de France at http://www.bnf.fr and I have also been using other national catalogs available on the net as a resource in NACO work.
Glenn Patton reported on activities of the IFLA Cataloguing Section. The working group on FRBR is about to release a web homepage, coordinated by Patrick Le Boeuf. His article in the ALCTS newsletter on IFLA activities is linked to the CC:DA agenda at the URL above. He chairs the Working Group on Functional Requirements of Authority Numbering and Records (FRANAR) which expects to release a model this summer. IFLA is planning on regional institutes of cataloging experts; though it was not stated, they sounded like the Toronto conference of a few years ago. The European one will be this summer in Frankfurt with Latin America following in 2004, Asia in 2006, and Middle East perhaps in 2005. African libraries largely use the ISBDs as cataloging rules and there has been little response to the idea of a regional institute. The UBCIM office now at the Deutsche Bibliothek will split into an internation MARC office at the National Library of Portugal and the Universal Bibliographic Control office remaining in Frankfurt.
Paul Weiss distributed a report on his activities as ALA representative to NISO. He also reported on ISO activities. One of the ISO standards is of interest to the cultural heritage community. The draft on “A reference ontology for the interchange of cultural heritage information” was approved and it will be released for ballot as a draft international standard in 2003. This effort is closely related to the work of CIDOC. cf. http://www.icom-cidoc.org
Matthew Beacom reported on the activities of the Joint Steering Committee which will be meeting in March. They had started toward replacing “item” with “manifestation” in AACR but changed their mind. They may now be moving to “resource” to avoid the loaded words of FRBR. FRBRizing the rules is more than merely changing words. On the agenda for the March meetings will be the chapter 25 proposals from the Format Variation Working Group, multi-part publications, and LC proposals on the appendix of major and minor changes. The 2003 amendments will include changes relating to dates for heads of government (24.20B2) suggested by the Canadians and changes to 21.30J (title added entries) also suggested by the Canadians.
An indexer has been hired by ALA Publications to work on the index to AACR. JSC will discuss the need for an editor at its spring meeting. This was a strange dejà vu discussion for us oldtimers that remember discussions of the personal element in earlier versions of AACR2. Nonetheless, there is a need in the rules for an individual voice with input from the community. In order to really FRBRize the rules, it is necessary to have a writer or at least a project manager. The rules currently are based on the item in hand while cataloging according to FRBR would start differently. Sherry Vellucci summarized the discussion as the need to rethink how we approach cataloging more than how we do it. As someone stated later, we need to refocus on the creation of the catalog rather than simply catalog records.
Cynthia Whitacre reported on the work of the Task Force on an Appendix of Major and Minor Changes. They asked four questions and the response was: consistency between sections on serials and other materials is helpful but does not need to be slavish; quotations from AACR2 are not necessary in the task force report; URIs may be included inthe report even though they appear in LCRIs rather than the rules; and examples should be as diverse and cross-media as reasonable. JSC has not supported the need for this appendix but the basic guidelines will be submitted to them again, perhaps for inclusion in the introduction. The CILIP-BL work on the introduction is currently stalled.
A preconference entitled “Knowledge without boundaries” is scheduled for Annual 2003 in Toronto. Fifteen speakers have been lined up to address Dublin Core, user needs and portals, perservation, efforts like LC’s BeAT, collections and digital content, ONIX, interoperability, AACR and MARC for electronic resources, Chinese efforts, semantic web, integrating resources, and authorities, with Clifford Lynch as the closing speaker. Registration will cost $425 and the preconference is scheduled for 19-20 June 2003.
ALCTS is also sponsoring a program on FRBR on Sunday morning, 22 June 2003. The speakers will be Vinod Chachra (VTLS), Barbara Tillett (LC), Tom Delsey (retired from NLC) and Glenn Patton (OCLC). This is a precursor to a preconference for Annual 2004 in Orlando.
Don Chatham reported that sales of the 2002 revision of AACR2 are selling at about the same rate as the 1998 revision with 85% being ordered with the binders (more than expected). It was suggested that the tabs should be sent with the text block even if the binder wasn’t ordered, recognizing that this was a packing problem. Replacement pages will be complete replacements with the update date in the footer. Though earlier reports had indicated that updates would be available in PDF, it was stated that this summer’s update package will not be available in PDF.
A few, mostly editorial, changes were made in a report on cartographic materials. The manual on cartographic materials has gone to the publishers (ALA) and they are beginning to work on it. Another document would add some examples to map rules to deal with an unpaged atlas, the solution looking like other unpaged items, e.g. 1 atlas (1 v. (unpaged)) OR 1 atlas (1 v. (various pagings). (Schiff/2002/1 on agenda)
A document on making the recording of other title information the same for integrating resources as for continuing resources was tabled so that the American Association of Law Librarians could review it. (Schiff/2002/2 on agenda)
Mike Chopey walked the committee through the report of the Task Force to Reconceptualize Chapter 9 (electronic resources). The hope is to make it less of a carrier chapter, with references to the appropriate content chapter used in combination with information about the electronic aspects. They will be looking at each chapter with this in mind. Two person teams will be responsible for each chapter. Some problems they are looking at: PDF and similar documents that are paginated but the number of pages may vary with computer settings; reproductions (again! the British Library uses Chapter 11 and does not follow the LCRI on reproductions); are digital realia (virtualia?) possible?; moving cross-chapter considerations to Chapter 1; Area 5 needs more guidance; would it be better to have a separate chapter for ERs and another for electronic aspects of other kinds of content.
John Attig presented the work of the Task Force on Consistency Across Part I. They have prepared extensive documentation of inconsistencies in Area 2 and 3. Area 6 is moving along and the analysis of Area 5 is done. They hope to have Area 5 and 6 ready for discussion in Toronto. Area 8 and 4 are next, with Area 0 and 7 needing work on the other areas completed first. While some of the numbering is breaking down, they will try to keep as much as possible since there are other efforts on major reorganization.
The CC:DA website will include a link to the FRBR site as soon as it is public. ALA and ALCTS are redesigning their sites and John Attig (webmaster) will keep materials at his PSU site for the near term, until the ALCTS site settles down and maintenance is regularized (in a timely manner).
Everett Allgood reported on MARBI discussions: Proposal 2003-01 approved defining $2 in 022 for ISSN Center code (extended to 006, not extended to authorities or holdings); Proposal 2003-02 approved defining $u in 538 for system details (with $i and $3 added); Discussion paper 2003-DP01 will lead to a proposal with two options for recording article level details in a single or separate subfield with $g being retained for AACR2 description; Discussion paper 2003-DP02 suggested changing the definitions of g and k in Leader/06 (interested communities, e.g. OLAC and VRA, need to discuss how type of material is retrieved); Discussion paper 2003-DP03 will lead to a proposal on adding 024 for other standard identifier to authority records (proposal needs to address the relationship of 024 to bib records and the transcription and characteristics of related metadata).
Since the clock had not struck midnight, the committee discussed an email flurry on the inclusion of relator terms in catalog records. The governing LCRI says generally not to apply relator terms. Issues: some metadata will not have related description and relator term is necessary to know role of creator; relator term not always one-to-one (e.g. Bernstein conducts Bernstein); relator terms might be helpful for FRBR grouping.