Print

Print


On the question of the AAP field, just to let you know, the approach of the
RIMMF [1]  RDA editor to generating an AAP (for as long as we have
pre-composed AAPs in the RDA model) is to auto-compose the AAP from the
identifying elements that are provided for the entity, but only when an 'AAP
checkbox' is ticked for an applicable element, i.e., using a mixture of
machine and human composition. 

For a Work, 'Preferred Title for the Work' is ticked by default to be
included in the AAP for the Work; and the first listed 'Creator' is also
ticked by default. Other attributes for which data has been provided can
then be manually ticked to have the data for those attributes added to the
AAP. 

So, in the example that follows, 'Author' and 'Preferred Title for the Work'
were both ticked by default, and the AAP was auto-composed from that element
data (using a default order). Although 'Date of Work' data was provided as
an attribute (because it was known), that attribute will not appear in the
AAP unless and until it is manually ticked: 
----------------------------------------------------
Author:  			Bryson, Bill  	 [X]
Preferred Title for the Work:  	A short history of nearly everything     [X]
Date of Work: 			2003      [ ]

Authorized Access Point:  	Bryson, Bill. A short history of nearly
everything
----------------------------------------------------

Note that the data in the 'Author' element for the Work, is itself an AAP
from the related Person entity data, and that AAP was auto-composed in the
same way in that data: 
-------------------------------------------------------
Preferred Name for the Person:  	 Bryson, Bill   [X]
Date of Birth:  				 1951	 [ ]

Authorized Access Point:        		 Bryson, Bill   
-------------------------------------------------------

This means that any changes to the 'Author' AAP for the Work cannot be made
in the Work data itself-those changes must be made to the data provided for
the Person. 

So, if for some reason we decide to add 'Date of Birth' data to the AAP for
the 'Author' element in the Work data, we would make that change in the AAP
that is provided for the Person data (just by ticking the 'Date of Work'):
-------------------------------------------------------
Preferred Name for the Person:  	 Bryson, Bill   [X]
Date of Birth:  				 1951	 [X ]

Authorized Access Point:        		 Bryson, Bill , 1951- 
-------------------------------------------------------

That change then immediately flows through to the data used for the 'Author'
element provided for the Work, which in turn automatically updates the AAP
for the Work: 
----------------------------------------------------
Author:  			Bryson, Bill, 1951-  	 [X]
Preferred Title for the Work:  	A short history of nearly everything     [X]
Date of Work: 			2003      [ ]

Authorized Access Point:  	Bryson, Bill, 1951- A short history of
nearly everything
----------------------------------------------------

We have Dave Reser to thank, for suggesting this 'checkbox' approach. 

For a version of this message showing screenshots of RIMMF data, instead of
text, go here:
http://www.marcofquality.com/wiki/rimmf/doku.php?id=aapexample

[1] http://www.marcofquality.com/wiki/rimmf/doku.php


Deborah
-  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  
Deborah Fritz
TMQ, Inc.
[log in to unmask]
www.marcofquality.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Trail, Nate
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2014 4:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] bibframe editor

Joyce, thanks for this detailed feedback. You are describing a number of
enhancements/issues that can be, as you say, addressed by developing local
profiles. We are developing a profile editor to facilitate that. Beyond
that, this is a good list of issues we can tackle. We spent very little
energy on the user experience, in favor of getting major components like the
ability to look up various terms, and your suggestions on lookups is
helpful.

On the question of the AAP field, I think it's a matter of policy. For some
institututions, the AAP is a very long string, including many
differentiating parts, in order to make the string unique in that
institution. It would not be hard for a system to have rules for which
fields to combine in which order, but deciding that is not something we can
do in a generic editor.

Thanks again,
Nate

-----------------------------------------
Nate Trail
LS/TECH/NDMSO
LA308, Mail Stop 4402
Library of Congress
Washington DC 20540


-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Joyce E. Bell
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2014 5:17 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BIBFRAME] bibframe editor

The testing group at Princeton looked at the editor as a functional tool for
doing their work and provided a number of comments which are summarized in
the text below.

Joyce Bell
Cataloging and Metadata Services Director Princeton University Library


BIBFRAME editor


Catalogers do not take well to the bibframe editor in its current structure.
Some of the complaints they have center around features which could be
accommodated by local profiles (display labels, presence of elements) while
other complaints are a bit more fundamental.


Separating the input form into separate sections for work, instance and
holdings seems like forcing the bibframe model on inputters when most (maybe
all?) of this distinction can happen behind the scenes and the cataloger
does not need to even be aware of it.  It makes sense for the order of
elements on the form to match the order in which data tends to be
encountered on material rather than forcing a cataloger to jump around
following the bibframe model.


Popup boxes are time-consuming and distracting.  For example: in the
instance I click on "provider entity" for publication.  A popup box appears.
I want to put in the provider's name so I click on organization for the
provider's name.  Now I am in a second popup box.  There is potential for
yet a third popup box if I want to fill in the authority assigner.    By the
time I click on that I have completely lost track of what I started doing.


Why do we have a box for the aap?  This should be generated by taking data
from other fields in the form. Since RDA still uses the concept of a main
entry that combined with the title forms the aap, the editor should allow us
to specify the name that is the main entry.  Doing so would allow for
auto-generation of the app and less duplication of data.  [Or we change
RDA?]


Visually the editor is troublesome.  Elements are spread out requiring a lot
of scrolling.  The labels can be very confusing.  When a data element is
set, very little of it is visible.  Some of the elements are not repeatable
yet they have to be set and then aren't editable without clicking them open,
editing them, then setting them again.


There are some bugs.  If a subject is mistakenly added as the wrong
type-place, for example, when it should have been topic-it must be deleted
and added as the correct type.  This is a far cry from changing 651 to 650.
The editor does not allow you to edit the lookup form of an instance title
(and since you can only view 15 characters, you can't see properly what was
chosen).  Are you supposed to go to the work lookup, which you can edit, to
see the full data?


Lookups for names or subjects using keyword functionality often makes
finding the right heading impossible.  Trying to set the subject for "London
(England)" I simply can't get that option to appear unless I type in
"Londinium" which I happen to know is a variant name.  Lookups are also less
than satisfactory when you need to view the authority record to choose the
correct entity.


The form structure is inconsistent.  For subjects, authors and editors the
form provides a row of buttons from which you choose the type.
Classification has separate row for each defined type of classification.  In
all cases the links lead to the same form no matter what type is chosen.  If
any differences are hidden behind the scenes, why not simplify the form?


LC, DDC and NLM classifications should have lookups.


ISBN popups should auto-populate the scheme.


The form doesn't allow for inputting of parallel fields for alternate
scripts.