Adjust transformation rules to RDA changes

acka47 commented 9 years ago

From 1 October 2015 people will be cataloging in hbz union catalog according to the RDA rules as documented here. We will have to adjust the transformation, i.e. the hbz01-to-lobid morph file accordingly.

After a first cursory look at the documents, I suggest the following approach:

Identifying RDA records RDA is only implemented to newly catalogued resources which get an RDA marker r in field 030, indicator=blank,position 4 of the Aleph sequentials (aseq), see the documentation. Thus, we will have to add the RDA transformation rules only for these records.

Checking fields that will be omitted Several fields won't be used anymore with RDA cataloging. You can see the list here. We will check whether and how we currently transform these to RDF.

Find out how to transform the new data to lobid'scurrent RDF data model After having identified the data fields where RDA means change we will have to find find out how we integrate the new RDA data into the the current lobid RDF.

Discuss how to handle breaks in the cataloging practice While we be able to make a seemless transformation for some of RDA cataloging so that lobid customers won't even notice that things have changed, this may not be possible for all of the changes. E.g., regarding IMD (Inhaltstyp, Medientyp, Datenträgertype)/CMC (content type, media type, carrier type) we will get better and more coherent information (see here for details).

On cases where cataloging practice significantly breaks, we will have to look, whether we will both try to map the data to the old/currrent data model and map the data according to RDA.

acka47 commented 9 years ago

Here is a list of RDA record in lobid courtesy of @donboern: rda-ids.txt

acka47 commented 9 years ago

Most of the reosurces listed in rda-ids.txt seem to be periodicals. Here is a print book: http://lobid.org/resource/HT018779822

acka47 commented 9 years ago

What seems important to me for the start is field 419 with the pbulisher, publication place/date information.

Snippet from http://lobid.org/resource/HT018779822:

<datafield ind2="1" ind1="-" tag="419">
            <subfield code="a">New York</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">Routledge</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">2014</subfield>
</datafield>

Snippet from http://lobid.org/resource/HT018772912:

          <datafield ind2="1" ind1="-" tag="419">
            <subfield code="a">Sundern</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">Baulmann Leuchten GmbH</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">2011-</subfield>
            <subfield code="A">3</subfield>
          </datafield>

dr0i commented 8 years ago

Thus, we will have to add the RDA transformation rules only for these records.

Does this mean that fields are ambiguous (i.e. e.g. 419-1c is the publication date if it's RDA catalogued but something different when it's old MAB2? (In this case I can see that that's not the case)). If there is no interference it's much simpler to configure the transformation rules, that's why I ask.