Hello Jennifer
We can do similar searches at the BL on our Aleph system, for terms in the 3XX fields. My doubts arise because of the inconsistent way the terms are recorded, and because in most older records they are not recorded at all. And I don't think our cataloguers do these searches. In any case, in we can also search terms in the 670 fields, in which the information has to be recorded *as well*, to support the 3XX.
So for the purposes of keyword searching by cataloguers, the terms are inconsistent in the 3XX fields, if present at all, and are quite likely to be represented in 670. In fact they will have been recorded in 670 fields for longer, and in a greater number of records. Albeit not controlled. Although as I've already suggested, many terms in 3XX fields are uncontrolled, and when they are controlled, they aren't maintained.
And I would like to know how our 3XX are helpful to users.
Regards
Richard
________________________
Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jenifer K Marquardt
Sent: 06 April 2017 13:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [PCCLIST] RDA metadata fields in name authority records
Good morning,
This is only a personal example, Richard, but I do use the 3xx fields for searching in OCLC. Mostly, I use OCLC's keyword option, but I also use the entity and level of description values with some regularity. Sometimes this is just to examine other records before I enter my own 3xx fields. But I use the fields, also, to narrow searches. I have only used the 046 field a couple of times in searching.
In terms of assigning the 3xx fields, I do feel that there is often more work/time involved than I can afford to spend on them. So, my usage during record creation is mixed.
Jenifer
Jenifer K. Marquardt
Asst. Head of Cataloging & Authorities Librarian University of Georgia Athens, GA 30602-1641
________________________________________
From: Program for Cooperative Cataloging [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Moore, Richard [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 2:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [PCCLIST] RDA metadata fields in name authority records
How useful are the terms we record in RDA metadata fields in name authority records? That is, the 046 field, and the various 3XX fields.
Given the time it takes to record, does anyone think this data is being used for anything, or is likely to be useful in any way? Not in theory, but in actual fact?
It seems to me that the main functions of a name authority record for a person are these:
To identify a person uniquely to a user looking at the authority record.
To provide a means of collocating bibliographic records with the correct person in resource discovery.
To provide enough information for automated matching in ISNI.
The additional 046/3XX fields are, as I understand it, intended to be used in displays in a way that no system does, and to provide a machine-readable means of achieving some kind of linked data goal. However, the fields are optional in NACO and are not included consistently. There is no requirement to use controlled terms, or to establish the terms in controlled vocabularies (SACO will not even accept proposals for new LCSH used in NARs). Terms that *are* taken from controlled vocabularies (LC/NAF, LCSH, LCDGT, etc.) are not maintained. So I'm uncertain of their value as potentially linked data.
Meanwhile, PCC is working towards an identifier-based model of identity management. ISNI matches data primarily on form of name, dates, and associated titles, and doesn't make use of the RDA metadata fields in NARs (affiliations in particular have performed poorly as factors in algorithmic matching of identities).
The first two goals above can also be achieved just by recording preferred and variant names, and the source information we have recorded in 670 fields since the year dot (and still record to justify the content of 046/3XX).
It's often the case that by the time everyone has implemented a new thing, the paradigm has shifted again and much of the new thing is no longer useful.
Resourcing constraints suggest that we should look at these things quite closely.
Regards
Richard
(My opinions, not necessarily those of anyone else)
________________________
Richard Moore
Authority Control Team Manager
The British Library
Tel.: +44 (0)1937 546104
E-mail: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
******************************************************************************************************************
Experience the British Library online at www.bl.uk<http://www.bl.uk/> The British Library's latest Annual Report and Accounts : www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html<http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/annrep/index.html>
Help the British Library conserve the world's knowledge. Adopt a Book. www.bl.uk/adoptabook<http://www.bl.uk/adoptabook>
The Library's St Pancras site is WiFi - enabled
*****************************************************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify the [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> : The contents of this e-mail must not be disclosed or copied without the sender's consent.
The statements and opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the British Library. The British Library does not take any responsibility for the views of the author.
*****************************************************************************************************************
Think before you print
|