Task Force on Metadata and the Cataloging Rules

Final Report (continued)

The Task Force has decided to refer the following draft recommendations to the Task Force on the Harmonization of the ISBD(ER) and AACR2 for consideration. It should be noted that these were still under discussion within the Task Force. See the discussion in the Appendix on the recommended change to 9.0B1.

1. Rewrite rule 9.0B1 (including its recent amendment) to include metadata in the list of examples for other formally presented internal evidence. Note that most, but not all, members of the Task Force agreed that the title screen should continue to function as the chief source of information for information to be transcribed in the title and statement of responsibility and edition areas.

   9.0B1. Chief source of information. The chief source of information for computer file(s) is the title screen(s). If there is no title screen, take the information from other formally presented internal evidence (e.g. main menus, program statements, first display of information, the header to the file, including “Subject” lines, information at the end of the file, <<< TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) header, embedded or attached metadata >>> ). In case of variations in fullness   . . .

2. Add examples in the two notes rules that specify inclusion of the source of information:

   9.7B3. Source of title proper. Always give the source of the title proper.

   . . .
   <<< Title from Dublin Core metadata >>>

   9.7B7. Edition and history. Give the source of the edition statement if is different from the source of the title proper.

   . . .
   <<< Ed. statement from TEI header >>>

3. Add examples in rule 9.7B4:

   9.7B4. Variations in title.   . . .

   . . .
   <<< Title from TEI header: <title> >>>

4. Review 9.8. Standard Number and Terms of Availability Area.

   Although not directly related to the work of the Task Force, members noted the need to record standard identifiers such as uniform resource locators (URLs) and uniform resource names (URNs) in catalog records, and AACR2’s lack of instruction for recording such information. This information appears in the 856 field in USMARC. It could be argued that URLs are equivalent to “shelf” locations and thus out of scope for AACR2. On the other hand, persistent uniform resource locators (PURLs), “handles,” and other schemes for stabilizing electronic addresses are standard numbers or identifiers in that they are intended to be unique and permanent. The Task Force recommends that the Task Force on ISBD(ER) propose to expand rule 9.8 to include instructions to record standard identifiers for electronic resources.

The Task Force designated liaisons to metadata projects including the Encoded Archival Description (EAD), Government Information Locator Service (GILS), Text Encoding Initiative (TEI), Dublin Core, Visual Resources Association (VRA) Core Categories, and the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The Task Force Chair attended a summit meeting on metadata organized by the Research Libraries Group and held in June, 1997. Task Force members interacted with the metadata community, either through attendance at meetings (Dublin Core international workshops; TEI anniversary conference) or through correspondence with editors and implementors (TEI).

We recommend that the new joint Task Force continue to pursue possibilities for meaningful collaboration.


CC:DA collaboration with the MARBI

With the creation of a new CC:DA Joint Task Force consisting of members from CC:DA and the MARBI, the library cataloging community is poised to move beyond the question of how catalogers should use metadata to address how library catalog data and other metadata can co-exist and complement each other, and what role catalogers will take in this broader environment of electronic publications.

We recommend that CC:DA, through the new joint Task Force, continue to monitor metadata developments for their potential impact on library catalogs and cataloging, and engage with other metadata developers in collaborations that stretch beyond the traditional library catalog.


Metadata and AACR2

The creation and use of metadata in the description of electronic resources is a matter of vital importance to the cataloging community. The Task Force on Metadata and the Cataloging Rules has made a start on analyzing a few of the most relevant metadata element sets. This work needs to be continued and expanded. The new joint Task Force will do just that, looking at issues that are common to both CC:DA and MARBI. However, there may be issues that only concern the cataloging rules. We recommend that CC:DA continue to monitor developments, and, as appropriate, to appoint further task forces to analyze additional metadata element sets as to their compatibility with AACR2.