 |
 |
This thread has already been ably commented on by multiple people, but I'd just like to summarize what I believe are the main points. Mr. Randall, Mr. Arakawa and other RDA proponents believe that RDA is accepted worldwide. They seem to feel that testing it trumps all other considerations of bibliographic access, given their insistence on using RDA forms of names that have already existent differentiated AACR2 name authority records. However, we have seen even from our admittedly small European sample of one (Mr. Moore of the British Library), that the same concerns about wilfully ignoring existing authority records are also held in Europe. We who are questioning the RDA test are therefore not a provincial group of cavemen, but professional catalogers and NACO/authorities maintainers with valid concerns about the quality of international library databases, and the damage to international recall of items that the RDA test (and, by extension, the adoption of RDA rules, if this is not addressed) will create, if it is not mandated that RDA catalogers use existing authority names when found. As Ms. Turner has correctly pointed out: "the important thing about an authority record is that it standardizes headings (with the help of automation) not that it meets some platonic ideal of what a heading should look like." By insisting on creating a platonic RDA form of a name instead of an already existing heading, RDA testers are compromising the integrity of the authority file, and thus not benefitting the patron in any way. It is, as Mr. Tribby states, "irresponsible" at best. It would lead to, as Mr. Moore asserts, ""cataloguing workflows across the world collapsing under the strain of the additional Authority Control resources required." And, frankly, many of the RDA name changes I've seen are not significantly different from the AACR2 forms; thus the international cost of wilfully ignoring existing authority records is not worth the supposed benefit of using the name form that an individual cataloger prefers. As Mr. Creider has mentioned, many libraries continued to use "AACR2-compatible headings" after AACR2 was established--why then, in a TEST, can't RDA catalogers do the same with AACR2 headings, especially in cases where the differences infinitesimally small? I hope that the Coordinating Committee is monitoring these discussions, and will take our concerns seriously. If they don't address this issue, I fear that the authority file will fall into irreparable disarray, and that the true goals of cataloging (no matter the rule set)--accuracy and recall--will be lost. Deborah Tomaras, NACO Coordinator Librarian II Western European Languages Team New York Public Library Library Services Center 31-11 Thomson Ave. Long Island City, N.Y. 11101 (917) 229-9561 [log in to unmask]