 |
 |
Re: the original question about RDA. I will continue to require AACR2, and hope against hope the ALA will supply enough copies for my students to buy it at the last minute. I don't think RDA's reached the stage where we know how it's going to be used, so it would be hard to teach anything that students could rely upon when it is implemented. This is especially true when you consider the announcement (made via Karen Coyle on NGC4LIB) that there will be an extensive new collaboration with the DC community for a Data Element Vocabulary. http://www.bl.uk/services/bibliographic/meeting.html All we can do is say "Here's where it stands today," and that may be vastly different from when we teach about in Week 3 of the Fall Semester! It seems that actual examination of the text should be in advanced classes, not in basic ones. > >By the way, for those who teach face to face (something I used to do >on an almost daily basis), does anyone share my concern about the >new rule numbering system in RDA (one of the few things that it is >now confirmed)? Almost impossible to remember (no alphabets, only >numbers) and hard to cite in a classroom without your novice >students having their impressions confirmed that cataloguing is far >too convoluted (let's look at rule 3.2.3.2.3a etc.). This is a major concern of mine. It's a great joy when students finally get the connection between ISBD as an international standard, and the extent of an ISBD description and how that all fits together in AACR2 rule numbering. RDA has no similar model to hang numbers on. I can't even imagine how working catalogers are going to keep the numbers straight. Maybe we should write clever, Gilbert & Sullivanesque mnemonic songs for students to memorize? -- Cheryl Boettcher Tarsala Adjunct Assistant Professor LEEP Program, Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] The views expressed here are my own and not those of UIUC or GSLIS.