Present: Angela Riggio, Beth Feinberg, Caroline Miller, Elie Chammou, Gia Aivazian, Janice Matthiesen, Jean Rashedi, Jeffrey Morehead, Joan LoPear, John Riemer, Luiz Mendes, Nancy Norris, Rebecca Aiken, Renée McBride, Rita Stumps, Valerie Bross
Dublin Core Presentation (part 2)
John Riemer
The
Last time I got as far as a run through of the 15 Dublin Core data elements, their definitions. We saw how plain DC did not map over to MARC very effectively. This session I hope we can go through the DC Qualified version of the data elements and practice applying them to a few materials.
Five years after the
basic elements were defined, in July 2000, the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
issued a list of recommended “Dublin Core Qualifiers” (commonly abbreviated
DCQ). The two broad classes of
qualifiers are “element refinement” and “encoding scheme.” “Refinement” refers to making an element
narrower in scope or more specific. An
example would be specifying that a Creator or Subject is personal or
corporate. An “encoding scheme” aids in
the interpretation of the data element it qualifies. Examples of schemes are which controlled
vocabulary a subject term is taken from or the particular standard affecting
how a date is coded.
The list of
qualifiers officially approved by the DC Usage Committee http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmes-qualifiers/ is not nearly as complete as what you can
find in the CORC platform. If you
examine CORC, you will find that OCLC has defined a lot more qualifiers; I
believe this reflects their interest in interoperability and support for the
MARC format, their interest in providing a maximally useful product. Thinking in terms of an assembly-line
workflow that starts with DC, it makes sense to “set the table” as much as
possible for the MARC cataloger.
Dublin Core
Qualified data elements have two or three parts, depending on whether the basic
data element is followed by a refinement and/or an indication of scheme. The DCQ element equivalent to a topical LCSH
is Subject.Topical.LCSH. A DCQ element
name is all written together with periods separating the qualifiers from the
main element. The periods are said
aloud, e.g. “subject-dot-topical-dot-LCSH.”
(For the DCQ, I will
go in the same data element presentation order as at our last meeting: this
meeting’s handout is again in alphabetical order of element name, for ease of
reference later on.)
The DCQ equivalent
to the title proper does not have any special qualifier. The basic element Title can be considered the
equivalent to the 245 field. A
Title.alternative is any form of the title used as a substitute or alternative
to the formal title of the resource.
Title [MARC 245]
Title.Alternative:
[MARC 246].
Also in CORC, you
will find
Title.uniform [MARC
130]
Title.alternativeUniform
[MARC 730]
Title.translated
[MARC 242]
Subject,
unqualified, has to be mapped as an uncontrolled keyword. With qualifiers, much more detailed mapping
becomes possible.
Subject [MARC 653]
Subject.topical.LCSH [MARC 650]
Subject.namePersonal.LCSH [MARC 600]
Subject.nameCorporate.LCSH [MARC 610]
Subject.nameConference.LCSH [MARC 611]
Subject.titleUniform.LCSH [MARC 630]
Subject.geographic.LCSH [MARC 651]
Other subject
schemes are provided for in CORC, including MeSH, LCSHac, and AAT.
The Subject element
also includes classification. Four
examples of the qualifiers available:
Subject.class.LCC [MARC 050 _4]
Subject.classLocal.LCC [MARC 090]
Subject.class.DDC [MARC 082]
Subject.class.SuDoc [MARC 086 0_]
Description is basically a note field. It is interesting to see that plain Description is mapped as a summary, to 520. Until preparing for this presentation, I had always thought 500 would have been better, safer default. Now that I think about it, Description was one of the four most basic data elements cited in focus group interviews of graduate students [reported in the Jimmie Lundgren and Betsy Simpson article “Looking Through Users' Eyes: What Do Graduate Students Need to Know About Internet Resources via the Library Catalog?” in Journal of Internet Cataloging 1(4) 1999 pp. 31-44 http://bubl.ac.uk/journals/lis/fj/jintcat/v01n0499.htm#looking ] as being the most important to include in a record for an e-resource. (Title, URL, and responsible person/body were the others.) So, in a sense, if there is only going to be one occurrence of Description in an e-resource record, odds probably are that it will be a summary.
Description
[MARC 520 8_]
Description.note [MARC 500 __]
Description.abstact [MARC 520 3_]
Description.tableOfContents [MARC 505 8_]
Description.summary [MARC 520 __]
Description.audience [MARC 521 __]
Description.audienceAge [MARC 521 1_]
Description.audienceGrade [MARC 521 0_]
Description.award [MARC 586]
Description.version [MARC 250]
Description.versionDetails [MARC 562 $c]
Description.versionDetails.MARC21-533 [MARC 533]
Type is basically a
genre term. Almost all of them
correspond to a 655 with a subfield $2 for the scheme the term is taken
from. Most scheme abbreviations can be
found at http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/re0006su.html#re00655b. The GMD is also categorized as Type
data. Type.note maps to a 516 (type of
computer file). “Plain” Type maps to a
local term.
Type
[MARC 655 _7 $2
local]
Type.AACR2-gmd [MARC 245 $h]
Type.AAT [MARC 655 _7 $2 aat]
Type.DCT [MARC 655 _7 $2 dct]
(http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-type-vocabulary/)
Type.ERICd [MARC 655 _7 $2 eric]
Type.GMGPC [MARC 655 _7 $2 gmgpc]
Type.GSAFD [MARC 655 _7 $2 gsafd]
Type.LCSH [MARC 655 _7 $2 lcsh]
Type.LCSHac [MARC 655 _7 $2 lcshac]
Type.LCTGM [MARC 655 _7 $2 lctgm]
Type.MeSH [MARC 655 _7 $2 mesh]
Type.Note [MARC 516 8_]
Source is a
reference to the source from which the resource is derived. You are familiar with the 533 field: in its
various subfields it is as if you are seeing a recapitulation of all the parts
of a different bibliographic record, from within the one you are working on. Likewise with the contents of a 786 field in
MARC; all those describe a source publication.
Source [MARC 786 08 $n]
Source.URI [MARC 786 08 $o]
Source.dateIssued [MARC 786 08 $g]
Source.extent [MARC 786 08 $h]
Source.publicationDetail [MARC 786 08 $d]
You’ll notice the
qualified Relation elements usually come in symmetric pairs. In the mappings you see some MARC tags we
generally don’t use. A pair of DC
Relation elements I used a lot in the Arts of the US project was
Relation.hasPart and Relation.isPartOf [demonstation example: search ‘Christian
Science Church’ and ‘galileo’ in CORC … look at MARC & DC views of the 4
records]. The other use I made of the
Relation element was Relation.isReferencedBy, to point to the published book
catalog that served as the source of the information about the image.
The one qualified DC
element unique to CORC is Relation.isPartOfSeries, and it also uniquely happens
not to have a counterpart, such as “Relation.hasSeries.”
Relation
[MARC 787 $n]
Relation.isVersionOf [MARC 775 08 $i Is Version Of $n]
Relation.hasVersion [MARC 775 08 $i Has Version $n]
Relation.isReplacedBy [MARC 785 00 $i Is Replaced By $n]
Relation.replaces [MARC 780 00 $i Replaces $n]
Relation.isRequiredBy [not featured in CORC; it sounds like
something that theoretically ought to exist]
Relation.requires [MARC 538]
Relation.isPartOf [MARC 773 0 $i Is Part Of $n]
Relation.hasPart [MARC 774 08 $i Has Part $n]
Relation.isReferencedBy [MARC 510 0_]
Relation.references [MARC 787 08 $i References $n]
Relation.isFormatOf [MARC 776 0
$i Is Format Of $n]
Relation.hasFormat [MARC 776 0
$i Has Format $n]
Relation.isPartOfSeries [MARC 490 0_]
Coverage is of two
varieties, place and time.
Coverage
[MARC 500 + “$3 coverage”]
Coverage.spatial:
[MARC 522 8_]
Coverage.spatial.ISO3166:
[no MARC equivalent in CORC]
These 2-character codes for countries are
different from MARC fixed-field country codes.
For
http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/codlstp1/index.html
It would be a real surprise if DCMI
recognized our geographic area codes (GACs).
Coverage.spatial.MARC21-gac: [MARC 043]
Coverage.spatial.DCMI
Box: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
Example of the concept: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-box/#sec2
Coverage.spatial.DCMI
Point: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
The idea is to use geographic coordinates.
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-point/#sec4
Coverage.spatial.TGN: [MARC 651 _7 $2 tgn]
The Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names
uses qualifiers that differ from AACR2 chapter 23. [Demonstration search for ‘
http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/tgn/index.html
Coverage.temporal: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
Coverage.temporal.DCMI
Period: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
The date ranges do not appear to be from an
editorially-established, controlled list.
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-period/#sec4
Coverage.temporal.W3C-DTF: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
Using this standard, dates are formulated
in a way you might have seen embedded in email messges.
http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime [scroll down to the 2 examples]
The 522 is a field we don’t usually use in our cataloging (http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/522.htm). That field amounts to free-text note describing spatial coverage.
For Creator,
Contributor, Publisher, and Rights, the DCMI Usage Committee has not
established any qualifiers. However,
CORC has, since the qualifiers would be crucial for accurate mapping to
MARC.
Creator
[CORC does not use the potential MARC equivalent: 720 field]
Creator.namePersonal [MARC 700 1_ + $4 cre]
Creator.nameCorporate [MARC 710 2_ + $4 cre]
Creator.nameConference [MARC 711 2_ + $4 cre]
Creator.namePersonal.MEntry [MARC 100 1_]
Creator.nameCorporate.MEntry
[MARC 110 2_]
Creator.nameConference.MEntry
[MARC 111 2_]
Contributor
[CORC does not use the potential MARC equivalent: 720 field]
Contributor.namePersonal [MARC 700 1_]
Contributor.nameCorporate [MARC 710 2_]
Contributor.nameConference [MARC 711 2_]
Both plain Publisher
and Publisher.name will map to 260 $b.
Publisher.place maps to 260 $a.
Publisher
[MARC 260 $b]
Publisher.namePersonal [MARC 700 1_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.nameCorporate [MARC 710 2_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.nameConference [MARC 711 2_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.place [MARC 260 $a]
Rights information
can map any of 3 different ways. If you
point to a rights statement instead of including actual text, the 856 field
mapping in CORC automatically includes the subfield ‘$3 rights.’
Rights
[MARC 540]
Rights.access [MARC 506]
Rights.URI [MARC 856 42 $u + “$3 rights”]
There are 5
different types of Date (available, created, issued, modified, and valid) and
the qualifier “issued” is the most analogous to publication date. Three different elements all map to what we
are familiar with: 260 $c & and the date in the fixed field.
Date.created is
treated like a printing or manufacture date: 260 $g.
Does it strike you
that many of the qualifiers for Date are centered around the life cycle of the
journal article? Create or write the
article; Modify or revise it; Issue or publish it; findings can have Validity
from the time the article is written.
Availability online
can be specified if it is not 24/7.
Here, some of the
MARC mappings are to fields we seldom see used.
Date.available uses
the 307 field http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/307.htm
Date.valid appears
to be a stretch to the 518 field, since that has been defined as date/time and
place of an event http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/518.htm
Date.modified is
also a reach: The 583 field (Action note) is usually used in conjunction with
processing archival material. Subfield
$a names the action and subfield $c says when it happened. Here the action refers to modification of a resource
(text).
At the time I was
involved in the Arts of the
[Each of the 5 DCQ
for Date can be rendered with either of the two schemes you saw used in
Coverage.temporal. If either of those
schemes is used, the DCQ won’t map to MARC in CORC.]
Date [MARC 260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued [MARC 260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued.MARC21-Date [MARC 260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued.MARC21-362 [MARC 362 1_]
Date.created [MARC 260 $g]
Date.available [MARC 307 8_ + $b Date Available]
Date.valid [MARC 518 + $3 Date Valid]
Date.modified [MARC 583
$a Modified $c [the date]]
Format refers to the
physical or digital manifestation of the resource.
The two qualifiers
are medium and extent. Both the plain
Format and the Format.medium.IMT that takes values from a controlled list map
to 856 $q. If you don’t include the
“IMT” scheme in your qualifier, then Format.medium will map to a 340 field,
which is a physical medium note, http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/340.htm.
Format.extent will map to a 300 field. (For the electronic equivalent of single-volume monographs, it might make sense to tell users how much data there is to read, download, or print out, although we don’t use the 300 field at in CORC cataloging now.)
Format.extentDuration
applies to A/V materials and will map to a 500 field with “$3 Duration.” To get that information to map to the 306
field, your qualifier would need to be Format.extentDuration.MARC21-306.
Format
[MARC 856 $q]
Format.medium.IMT
[MARC 856 $q]
http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/media-types/media-types
Format.medium [MARC 340]
http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/340.htm
Format.extent [MARC 300 $a]
Format.extentDuration.MARC21-306
[MARC 306 (numerical string in
format of hhmmss)]
Format.extentDuration
[MARC 500 $a + $3 Duration]
Both plain
Identifier and Identifier.URI map to the 856 field. Notice that the qualifier is URI versus URL,
since URL is just one type of Uniform Resource Identifier. If you are working with
commercially-published resources, a variety of other numbers might apply.
For almost any of
the Identifiers that are numbers, the qualifier “incorrect” is possible. If included, it goes in the “middle”
position, before the scheme, e.g. Identifier.incorrect.ISBN. A second such qualifier, “canceled,” can
apply to ISSNs, and it works the same way: Identifier.canceled.ISSN.
Identifier
[MARC 856 40]
Identifier.URI [MARC 856 40]
Identifier.LCCN [MARC 010]
Identifier.NLCcn [MARC 016]
Identifier.ISBN [MARC 020]
Identifier.ISSN [MARC 022]
Identifier.SICI [MARC 024 4_]
(Serial Item & Contribution Identifier)
Identifier.EAN [MARC 024 3_]
(13-digit international article number)
Identifier.citation [MARC 524 8_]
(Preferred Citation of Described Materials Note)
The Language
element, qualified or not, maps to the 546 field. Nothing is mapped to fixed field Lang,
because it is not possible.
Language
[MARC 546]
Language.ISO639-2 [MARC 546]
http://lcweb.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html
Language.RFC1766 [MARC 546 $a + $b RFC 1766]
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1766.txt
(We’ll resume next
meeting with a couple of exercises)
Announcements
Rita: The department
now has a subscription to Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, shelved in
the reference collection.
John: November
meetings of Catalogers Group on 1st and 15th.
[Handouts from this
and the previous meeting follow.]
List of Dublin Core Data Elements
(unqualified)
Catalogers Group
Contributor: An entity responsible for making
contributions to the content of the resource.
Coverage: The extent or scope of the content of
the resource.
Creator: An entity primarily responsible for
making the content of the resource.
Date:
A date associated with an event in the life cycle of the resource.
Description: An account of the content of the
resource.
Format: The physical or digital manifestation
of the resource.
Recommended best
practice is following the Internet Media Types (MIME) list:
http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/media-types/media-types
[Resource] Identifier: An unambiguous reference to
the resource within a given context.
Language: A language of the intellectual
content of the resource.
Publisher: An entity responsible for making the
resource available.
Relation: A reference to a related resource.
Rights [Management]: Information about rights
held in and over the resource.
Source: A Reference to a resource from which
the present resource is derived.
Subject [and Keywords]: The topic of the
content of the resource.
Title:
A name given to the resource.
[Resource] Type: The nature or genre of the
content of the resource.
DCQ Elements & Crosswalk to MARC
Catalogers Group
All DCQ elements
below are supported in CORC. Italicized
are elements specific to OCLC/CORC. The
non-italicized are recognized by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.
Contributor
[CORC does not use the potential MARC equivalent: 720 field]
Contributor.namePersonal
[700 1_]
Contributor.nameCorporate
[710 2_]
Contributor.nameConference
[711 2_]
Coverage
[MARC 500 + “$3 coverage”]
Coverage.spatial:
[522 8_]
Coverage.spatial.ISO3166:
[no MARC equivalent in CORC]
http://www.din.de/gremien/nas/nabd/iso3166ma/codlstp1/index.html
Coverage.spatial.MARC21-gac: [043]
Coverage.spatial.DCMI
Box: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
Ex.: http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-box/#sec2
Coverage.spatial.DCMI
Point: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-point/#sec4
Coverage.spatial.TGN: [651 _7 $2 tgn]
http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/tgn/index.html
Coverage.temporal: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
Coverage.temporal.DCMI
Period: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-period/#sec4
Coverage.temporal.W3C-DTF: [no MARC equivalent in CORC]
http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-datetime [scroll down to the 2 examples]
Creator
[CORC does not use the potential MARC equivalent: 720 field]
Creator.namePersonal
[700 1_ + $4 cre]
Creator.nameCorporate
[710 2_ + $4 cre]
Creator.nameConference
[711 2_ + $4 cre]
Creator.namePersonal.MEntry
[100 1_]
Creator.nameCorporate.MEntry [110 2_]
Creator.nameConference.MEntry [111 2_]
Date [260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued [260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued.MARC21-Date
[260 $c & 008 Date 1]
Date.issued.MARC21-362
[362 1_]
Date.created [260 $g]
Date.available [307 8_ + $b Date Available]
Date.valid [518 + $3 Date Valid]
Date.modified [583
$a Modified $c [the date]]
Description [520
8_]
Description.abstract [520 3_]
Description.tableOfContents [505 8_]
Description.audience
[521 __]
Description.audienceAge
[521 1_]
Description.audienceGrade
[521 0_]
Description.award
[586]
Description.note [500]
Description.summary
[520 __]
Description.version
[250]
Description.versionDetails
[562 $c]
Description.versionDetails.MARC21-533 [533]
Format
[856 $q]
Format.medium.IMT
[856 $q]
http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/media-types/media-types
Format.medium [340]
http://www.oclc.org/oclc/bib/340.htm
Format.extent [300 $a]
Format.extentDuration.MARC21-306 [306]
(numerical string in format of
hhmmss)
Format.extentDuration [500 $a + $3 Duration]
Identifier
[856 40]
Identifier.URI [856 40]
Identifier.LCCN
[010]
Identifier.NLCcn
[016]
Identifier.ISBN
[020]
Identifier.ISSN
[022]
Identifier.SICI
[024 4_] (Serial Item &
Contribution Identifier)
Identifier.EAN
[024 3_] (13-digit international
article number)
Identifier.citation
[524 8_] (Preferred Citation of
Described Materials Note)
Language
[546]
Language.ISO639-2 [546]
http://lcweb.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/langhome.html
Language.RFC1766 [546 $a + $b RFC 1766] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1766.txt
Publisher
[260 $b]
Publisher.namePersonal
[700 1_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.nameCorporate
[710 2_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.nameConference
[711 2_ + $4 pbl]
Publisher.place
[260 $a]
Relation
[787 $n]
Relation.isVersionOf [775 08 $i Is Version Of $n]
Relation.hasVersion [775 08 $i Has Version $n]
Relation.isReplacedBy [785 00 $i Is Replaced By $n]
Relation.replaces [780 00 $i Replaces $n]
Relation.isRequiredBy [not featured in CORC]
Relation.requires [538]
Relation.isPartOf [773 0 $i Is Part Of $n]
Relation.hasPart [774 08 $i Has Part $n]
Relation.isReferencedBy [510 0_]
Relation.references [787 08 $i References $n]
Relation.isFormatOf [776 0
$i Is Format Of $n]
Relation.hasFormat [776 0
$i Has Format $n]
Relation.isPartOfSeries [490 0_]
Rights
[540]
Rights.access
[506]
Rights.URI
[856 42 $u + $3 rights]
Source
[786 08 $n]
Source.URI [786 08 $o]
Source.dateIssued [786 08 $g]
(volume or date of part/issue resource is taken from)
Source.extent [786 08 $h]
(physical description of the
original)
Source.publicationDetail [786 08 $d]
(Place, Publisher, and date of original)
Subject [653]
Subject.topical.LCSH
[650 _0]
Subject.namePersonal.LCSH
[600 10]
Subject.nameCorporate.LCSH
[610 20]
Subject.nameConference.LCSH
[611 20]
Subject.titleUniform.LCSH
[630 00]
Subject.geographic.LCSH
[651 _0]
Subject.topical.AAT
[650 _7 $2 aat]
Subject.class.LCC
[050 _4]
Subject.classLocal.LCC
[090]
Subject.class.DDC
[082]
Subject.class.SuDoc
[086 0_]
Title [245]
Title.alternative [246]
Title.uniform
[130]
Title.alternativeUniform
[730]
Title.translated
[242]
Type
[655 _7 $2 local]
Type.AACR2-gmd [245 $h]
Type.AAT [655 _7 $2 aat]
Type.DCT [655 _7 $2 dct] (http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-type-vocabulary/)
Type.ERICd [655 _7 $2 eric]
Type.GMGPC [655 _7 $2 gmgpc]
Type.GSAFD [655 _7 $2 gsafd]
Type.LCSH [655 _7 $2 lcsh]
Type.LCSHac [655 _7 $2 lcshac]
Type.LCTGM [655 _7 $2 lctgm]
Type.MeSH [655 _7 $2 mesh]
Type.Note [516 8_]
Most subfield $2
values are from http://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/re0006su.html#re00655b