Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
10/15/11<br />LIS 4010 <br />October 18, 2011<br />Assignment A4<br />Group: Rebecca, Max, Johnny, Holly, Jayna, and Jules...
10/15/11<br />A Brief Refresher on Archives <br /><ul><li>Archives preserve unique records of value that document organiza...
Records can be in a variety of formats (text, images, etc.)
Records are generally arranged and described in groups, not at the item level.</li></li></ul><li>10/15/11<br />Standards P...
Data content (metaphor: the LIQUID inside the bottles): DACS
Data format (metaphor: the CRATE carrying the bottles): XML
Data exchange (metaphor: the PERSON DELIVERING the crate): OAI</li></ul>( Elings & Waibel article)<br />
10/15/11<br />EAD (Encoded Archival Description)<br /><ul><li>EAD is used for encoding finding aids so that they may be di...
It does not prescribe content – that's left to content standards (DACS)</li></li></ul><li>10/15/11<br />EAD - History<br /...
Daniel Pitti was the principal investigator behind the EAD project. He wanted EAD to be able to: present extensive and int...
10/15/11<br />DTDs (Document Type Definitions)<br />Define, with their own notations, the structure of a particular type o...
10/15/11<br />Schemas<br /><ul><li>Are richer forms of DTDs
Define the contents and semantics of documents, in addition to their structure </li></ul>   (Taylor & Joudrey, p. 145 – 15...
10/15/11<br />Example of EAD <br />Minimum tags required for an EAD file:<br />	<ead><eadheader><eadid>...</eadid><filedes...
10/15/11<br />Putting It All Together <br />DTD/Schema file (rules) <br />+ EAD XML file (actual finding aid)<br />+ Style...
EAD – Advantages <br />Advantages:<br />Allows for effective searching, display, retrieval, and display of information fou...
EAD – Disadvantages <br />Disadvantages:<br />International use of EAD: non-English speakers are basically expected to und...
Resources<br />Required textbook: <br />Taylor, A.G., & Joudrey, G.N. (2008). The Organization of Information. 3rd ed. Eng...
MARC: Machine-Readable Cataloging Record<br />The MARC formats are standards for the representation and communication of b...
Origins<br /><ul><li>The original MARC format was developed at the Library of Congress in the mid-1960’s.
USMARC, originally known as "LCMARC," is the U.S. implementation of the generic standard for the construction of communica...
Other countries developed their own MARC formats such as CAN/MARC and UKMARC
After having discussions and making minor changes to both formats that accommodated USMARC and CAN/MARC users' specific ne...
In 2002, the Library of Congress developed the MARC-XML schema as an alternative record structure, allowing MARC records t...
Cross Domain through Content Standards<br /><ul><li>The concept behind a MARC record for Archival use dates back to the ea...
The primary standards used for the exchange of information about archives and manuscripts are:
USMARC Format for Archival and Manuscripts Control (USMARC AMC)
Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts: A Cataloging Manual for Archives, Historical Societies, and Manuscript Librari...
In 1977 the SAA (Society of American Archivists) created NISTF (National Information Systems Task Force) which advocated f...
APPM is a standard for developing a catalog of archival materials, principally at the collection level, with consistent de...
Strengths<br /><ul><li>MARC’s greatest strength is that it is an established, proven format with proven interoperability w...
There are several robust software systems that support creating and managing MARC records.
Connection to well defined content standards such as AACR2 and APPM.</li></ul>Source: Scurlock Photographs Cataloging Anal...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

EAD, MARC and DACS

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all
  • Login to see the comments

EAD, MARC and DACS

  1. 1. 10/15/11<br />LIS 4010 <br />October 18, 2011<br />Assignment A4<br />Group: Rebecca, Max, Johnny, Holly, Jayna, and Jules <br />Archives <br />Standards: <br />EAD, DACS, and MARC<br />
  2. 2. 10/15/11<br />A Brief Refresher on Archives <br /><ul><li>Archives preserve unique records of value that document organizational or personal activities.
  3. 3. Records can be in a variety of formats (text, images, etc.)
  4. 4. Records are generally arranged and described in groups, not at the item level.</li></li></ul><li>10/15/11<br />Standards Pertaining to Archives <br /><ul><li>Data structure (metaphor: the BOTTLES): EAD & MARC
  5. 5. Data content (metaphor: the LIQUID inside the bottles): DACS
  6. 6. Data format (metaphor: the CRATE carrying the bottles): XML
  7. 7. Data exchange (metaphor: the PERSON DELIVERING the crate): OAI</li></ul>( Elings & Waibel article)<br />
  8. 8. 10/15/11<br />EAD (Encoded Archival Description)<br /><ul><li>EAD is used for encoding finding aids so that they may be displayed on the Web. (Taylor & Joudrey, p. 11-13)
  9. 9. It does not prescribe content – that's left to content standards (DACS)</li></li></ul><li>10/15/11<br />EAD - History<br /><ul><li>EAD began with a project at the University of California at Berkeley in 1993. (EAD Version 2002, Official Site)
  10. 10. Daniel Pitti was the principal investigator behind the EAD project. He wanted EAD to be able to: present extensive and interrelated descriptive information found in archival finding aids, and preserve the hierarchical relationships existing between different levels of description. (EAD Version 2002, Official Site) </li></li></ul><li>Alphabet Soup: EAD, XML, DTD, Schema<br />EAD is encoded in XML using SGML/XML DTD or an XML schema.<br />XML defines structure and not style, making it extremely flexible.<br />DTD (Document Type Definition) and schema are basically “rules” for the structure in an XML document.<br />Schema can go further in defining contents and semantics.<br />10/15/11<br />
  11. 11. 10/15/11<br />DTDs (Document Type Definitions)<br />Define, with their own notations, the structure of a particular type of document <br />Gives advance notice of what names and structures can be used in a particular document type, so that all documents that belong to a particular type will be alike <br />Can be thought of as like a template for a particular type of document <br />Example<br />
  12. 12. 10/15/11<br />Schemas<br /><ul><li>Are richer forms of DTDs
  13. 13. Define the contents and semantics of documents, in addition to their structure </li></ul> (Taylor & Joudrey, p. 145 – 151)<br />Example<br />
  14. 14. 10/15/11<br />Example of EAD <br />Minimum tags required for an EAD file:<br /> <ead><eadheader><eadid>...</eadid><filedesc><titlestmt><titleproper>...</titleproper></titlestmt></filedesc></eadheader><archdesclevel = “fonds”><did>...</did><dsc type = “combined”>...</dsc></archdesc></ead><br />EAD Elements (tags)<br />Examples<br />
  15. 15. 10/15/11<br />Putting It All Together <br />DTD/Schema file (rules) <br />+ EAD XML file (actual finding aid)<br />+ Style sheet<br />= Human-readable (HTML) output<br />DPL Western History finding aids<br />Princeton University<br />
  16. 16. EAD – Advantages <br />Advantages:<br />Allows for effective searching, display, retrieval, and display of information found in archival finding aids<br />The official site of EAD Version 2002 offers a tag library, complete with detailed descriptions of elements. <br />There is a lot of documentation on EAD DTDs and schemas, offering many examples and crosswalks. <br />Significance: new users unfamiliar with EAD have some assistance in implementing it; easier for one user to pick up where a previous user left off <br />(From: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article…)<br />
  17. 17. EAD – Disadvantages <br />Disadvantages:<br />International use of EAD: non-English speakers are basically expected to understand and apply a standard that is English-oriented <br />Solution: create versions of it for other languages<br />Example: HyTime architectural form processing, which allows language-specific versions of EAD that can be mapped to the English version <br />Content standards for EAD are not agreed upon<br />Significance: affects interoperability <br />Popular toolsets for use on EAD are difficult to use <br />(From: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november99/11pitti.htm<br />& http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article…)<br />
  18. 18. Resources<br />Required textbook: <br />Taylor, A.G., & Joudrey, G.N. (2008). The Organization of Information. 3rd ed. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. <br />Articles: <br />Elings, M. W., & Waibel, G. (2007). Metadata for all: Descriptive standards and metadata-sharing across libraries, archives, and museums. First Monday 12 (3).<br />Online resources:<br />http://www.loc.gov/ead/ (EAD Version 2002, Official Site)<br />http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november99/11pitti.htm<br />http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article…<br />http://library.syr.edu/digital/guides/marac/marac.ppt<br />
  19. 19. MARC: Machine-Readable Cataloging Record<br />The MARC formats are standards for the representation and communication of bibliographic and related information in machine-readable form.<br />Machine-Readable means that a computer can read and interpret the data in the cataloging record.<br />Cataloging Record means a bibliographic record. This is traditionally the information shown on a catalog card. <br />The record includes but is not limited to: <br />a description of the item<br />main entry and added entries<br />subject headings<br />the classification or call number. <br />Source: Understanding MARC Bibliographic: Machine Readable Cataloging at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/umb/<br />
  20. 20. Origins<br /><ul><li>The original MARC format was developed at the Library of Congress in the mid-1960’s.
  21. 21. USMARC, originally known as "LCMARC," is the U.S. implementation of the generic standard for the construction of communication formats.
  22. 22. Other countries developed their own MARC formats such as CAN/MARC and UKMARC
  23. 23. After having discussions and making minor changes to both formats that accommodated USMARC and CAN/MARC users' specific needs, the USMARC and CAN/MARC (Canadian MARC) formats were “harmonized” into MARC 21 in 1997.
  24. 24. In 2002, the Library of Congress developed the MARC-XML schema as an alternative record structure, allowing MARC records to be represented in XML.</li></ul>Source: Standards for Archival Description: A Handbook at: http://www.archivists.org/catalog/stds99/index.html<br />MARC21 FAQ at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html<br />Wikipedia: MARC Standards at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARC_standards<br />
  25. 25. Cross Domain through Content Standards<br /><ul><li>The concept behind a MARC record for Archival use dates back to the early 70’s when the Library of Congress issued a series of individual MARC formats for different kinds of materials.
  26. 26. The primary standards used for the exchange of information about archives and manuscripts are:
  27. 27. USMARC Format for Archival and Manuscripts Control (USMARC AMC)
  28. 28. Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts: A Cataloging Manual for Archives, Historical Societies, and Manuscript Libraries (APPM)..
  29. 29. In 1977 the SAA (Society of American Archivists) created NISTF (National Information Systems Task Force) which advocated for a common format for archival information. The final version of the AMC format was made available to the public in 1985.
  30. 30. APPM is a standard for developing a catalog of archival materials, principally at the collection level, with consistent descriptions and access points that can be integrated into bibliographic catalogs constructed using Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules. It was first published by the Library of Congress in 1983.</li></ul>Sources: Standards for Archival Description: A Handbook at: http://www.archivists.org/catalog/stds99/index.html<br />A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology at: http://www.archivists.org/glossary/index.asp<br />
  31. 31. Strengths<br /><ul><li>MARC’s greatest strength is that it is an established, proven format with proven interoperability with libraries and other institutions.
  32. 32. There are several robust software systems that support creating and managing MARC records.
  33. 33. Connection to well defined content standards such as AACR2 and APPM.</li></ul>Source: Scurlock Photographs Cataloging Analysis www.adammathes.com/academic/archives/eadscurlock.html<br />
  34. 34. Weaknesses<br />It was originally created for Library uses though and that is it’s greatest weakness by itself. ACM and APPM were a few of the content standards created to combat this weakness.<br />MARC is a complex system, extensive knowledge and specialized cataloging software is often required create and understand records.<br />MARC generally lacks the tools to represent the inherent hierarchy in archival collections.<br />Narrow domain- MARC is an application specific format compared to general technology like XML.<br />Source: Scurlock Photographs Cataloging Analysis www.adammathes.com/academic/archives/eadscurlock.html<br />
  35. 35. The Future<br /><ul><li>At the 2009 ALA annual conference Ted Fons from OCLC spoke on “Beyond the Record: OCLC and the future of MARC.” He discussed what OCLC was doing to move beyond MARC 21. His discussion centered on OCLC's Crosswalk Web Service, known as a common data format (CDF) hub model, used to move information in and out of WorldCat.
  36. 36. A few other speakers at this conference also discussed the future of MARC and the consensus was that a new data format (RDA?) was needed and that MARC was needed for a while longer, until all data can be converted to an agreed upon new format, it’s future is limited.</li></ul>Source: 2009 American Library Association Annual Conference: Reports of Selected Sessions at:http://0-www.sciencedirect.com.bianca.penlib.du.edu/science/article/pii/S0098791309001178<br />
  37. 37. Typicalvideorecordingin card format:<br />Typicalvideorecordingin card format:<br />TH9148The Adventures of Safety Frog. Fire safety[videorecording] / Century 21 Video, Inc. -- Van Nuys, Calif. : AIMS Media, 1988.<br />1 videocassette (10 min.) : sd., col. ; 1/2 in.<br />Cataloged from contributor's data.<br />VHS.<br />Audience: Elementarygrades.<br />Issuedalsoasmotionpicture.<br />Summary: SafetyFrogteacheschildren to be firesafe,explainingthatsmartkidsnever play with matches. She shows howsmoke detectors work and explainswhythey are necessary. Shealsodescribeshow to avoidhouseholdaccidentsthatlead to fires and how to stop, drop, and rollifclothing catches fire.For sale ($195.00) or rent ($50.00)<br />1. Fireprevention -- Juvenilefilms. 2. Fire detectors -- Juvenilefilms. 3. Dwellings -- Fires and fireprevention -- Juvenilefilms. 4. Puppetfilms. 5. Fireprevention. 6. Safety. I. Century 21 Video, Inc. II. AIMS Media. III. Title: Firesafety [videorecording]<br />Dewey Class no.: 613.6 -- dc 11<br />89-711816<br />MARC <br />
  38. 38. The same record with MARC 21 content designators:<br />Leader *****ngm 22*****1a 4500<br />001 89711816 <br />003 DLC<br />005 19891107152635.3<br />007 vfcbaho<br />008 890719s1988 cau010 c v1eng c<br />010 ## $a 8911816 <br />020 ## $c For sale ($195.00) or rent ($50.00)<br />040 ## $a AIMS Media<br />050 10 $a TH9148<br />082 10 $a 613.6 $2 11<br />245 04 $a The Adventures of Safety Frog. $p Fire<br /> safety $h [videorecording] / <br /> $c Century 21 Video, Inc.<br />246 30 $a Fire safety $h [videorecording]<br />260 ## $a Van Nuys, Calif. : $b AIMS Media, $c 1988. <br />300 ## $a 1 videocassette (10 min.) : $b sd., col. ;<br /> $c 1/2 in.<br />500 ## $a Cataloged from contributor's data.<br />538 ## $a VHS. <br />521 ## $a Elementarygrades.<br />530 ## $a Issuedalsoasmotionpicture.<br />520 ## $a SafetyFrogteacheschildren to be firesafe,<br />explainingthatsmartkidsnever play with<br />matches. She shows howsmoke detectors work <br /> and explainswhythey are necessary. Shealso<br />describeshow to avoidhouseholdaccidents<br />thatlead to fires and how to stop, drop, <br /> and rollifclothing catches fire.<br />650 #0 $a Fireprevention $v Juvenilefilms.<br />650 #0 $a Fire detectors $v Juvenilefilms.<br />650 #0 $a Dwellings $x Fires and fireprevention $v<br />Juvenilefilms.<br />650 #0 $a Puppet films.<br />650 #1 $a Fireprevention.<br />650 #1 $a Safety.<br />710 2# $a Century 21 Video, Inc.<br />710 2# $a AIMS Media.<br />Source: Understanding MARC: Marc21 Reference Materials at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/umb/um11to12.html<br />
  39. 39. MARC EXAMPLEFULL LEVEL RECORD - THREE-DIMENSIONAL ITEM<br />Leader/00-23 *****crm##22*****#a#4500<br />001 <control number><br />003 <control number identifier><br />005 19920902031155.0<br />008/00-39 870119q18601869xxunnn############rn####d<br />040 ##$a[organization code]$c[organization code]<br />043 ##$an-us---<br />045 ##$aw6w6<br />050 14$aE468.9$b.C3<br />245 00$a[Cannon ball]$h[realia].<br />260 ##$c[186-]$e(United States :$f[s.n.])<br />300 ##$a1 cannon ball :$blead, gray ;$c10 cm. in diam.<br />500 ##$aTitle supplied by cataloger.<br />520 ##$a"12-pounder" cannon ball used in the Civil War.<br />650 #0$aOrdnance.<br />#0$aUnited States$xHistory$yCivil War, 1861-1865.<br />Source: MARC21 Bibliographic – Full Record Examples at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/examples.html<br />
  40. 40. Describing Archives: A Content StandardDACS<br />Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS) was officially approved by the Society of American Archivists as an SAA standard in March 2004, following review by its Standards Committee, its Technical Subcommittee for Descriptive Standards, and by the general archival community.<br />Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.<br />
  41. 41. DACS is an output-neutral set of rules for describing archives, personal papers, and manuscript collections, and can be applied to all material types. It is the U.S. implementation of international standards   (i.e., ISAD(G) and ISAAR(CPF)) for the description of archival materials and their creators. As a replacement for Archives,Personal Papers, and Manuscripts.<br />Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.<br />
  42. 42. DACS was produced by the Canadian-U.S. Task Force on Archival Description (CUSTARD) and funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)<br />DACS is a content standard for creating access tools for archival materials, published in 2004 by the Society of American Archivists (SAA). DACS supersedes Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts (APPM) published by the Society of American Archivists (SAA) in 1989.<br /> Applicable to all types of archival materials at all levels of description DACS can be used for any type of descriptive output, including the two most widely used standards, MARC 21 and Encoded Archival Description (EAD). <br />Source: ODLIS http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/searchODLIS.aspx<br />
  43. 43. DACS is divided into three parts <br />"Describing Archival Materials," "Describing Creators," and "Forms of Names” <br />DACS also includes a glossary, a list of companion standards, and crosswalks to APPM, ISAD(G), ISAAR(CPF), MARC 21, and EAD. <br />Source: ODLIS http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/searchODLIS.aspx<br />
  44. 44. Archivists and catalogers can use DACS to describe archival materials at any level of specificity, from the collection to the item level. DACS includes an overview of archival description (including the requirements for effective multilevel description), outlines the elements that must be included at different levels of description, and describes how those elements should be implemented.  <br />In addition, DACS provides specific guidance in describing creators of archival material, constructingarchival authority records, and recording forms of names.  DACS may also be used in conjunction with other standards to treat aspects of description unique to specific media types.  <br />Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.<br />
  45. 45. Strengths<br />DACSis a flexiblestandard ~ allows for sound professional judgment in the context of a specific repository’s collections and users<br />Output Neutrality ~ Separation of content and carrier<br />Content vs. Context ~ Separation of descriptive content<br /> from historical or biographical context.<br />Multi-Level of description ~ can have many levels of <br /> description<br />No Abbreviations ~ which is more user friendly for non-<br />English speaking people.<br />Creatorship ~ a creator can be a person, family, or body <br />that assembled and/or maintained and used records in the <br /> conduct of personal or corporate activity. <br />No Artificial Collections ~ materials gathered by a person or family for some purpose rather than gathered organically<br />Source: Whittaker, B. M. DACS and RDA: Insights and Questions from the New Archival Descriptive Standard. Library Resources & Technical Services v. 51 no. 2 (April 2007) p. 98-105<br />
  46. 46. Weaknesses<br />Need to simplify records and tailor resource description to both users and the materials<br /> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br /> Only Used by the U.S.A archival community<br /> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br />Needs to have a bolder approach to serve the digital era<br /> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br />So many other content standards <br />to work from that it is aa blessing and a curse.<br />~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br />Source: Whittaker, B. M. DACS and RDA: Insights and Questions from the New Archival Descriptive Standard. Library Resources & Technical Services v. 51 no. 2 (April 2007) p. 98-105<br />
  47. 47. The Future<br />Resource Description and Access (RDA) is being developed as a new standard designed for the digital world, covering all types of content and media (both digital and analog) with greater flexibility the Anglo- American Cataloguing Rules – Second Edition (AACR2)<br />DACS will be seen as a smaller and more focused implementation of RDA<br />In general, searching future needs both libraries and archives should collaborate in finding the best possible next step to keep up with user service and the user interface like that of Amazon and Google.<br />Sources: Whittaker, B. M. DACS and RDA: Insights and Questions from the New Archival Descriptive Standard. Library Resources & Technical Services v. 51 no. 2 (April 2007) p. 98-105<br />RDA’s website: http://www.rdaonline.org/<br />
  48. 48. CONDITIONS OF ACCESS AND USE ELEMENTS (chapter 4)<br /><ul><li>Conditions governing access
  49. 49. Physical access
  50. 50. Technical Access
  51. 51. Conditions Governing Reproduction and Use
  52. 52. Languages and Scripts of the Material
  53. 53. Finding Aids</li></ul>ACQUISITION AND APPRAISAL ELEMENTS (chapter 5)<br /><ul><li>Conditions governing Custodial history
  54. 54. Immediate Source of Acquisition
  55. 55. Appraisal, Destruction, and Scheduling Information
  56. 56. Accruals</li></ul>RELATED MATERIAS ELEMENTS (ch 6)<br /><ul><li>Existence and location of originals
  57. 57. Existence and location of copies
  58. 58. Related archival materials
  59. 59. Publication note </li></ul>NOTES ELEMENT (chapter 7)<br /><ul><li>Note not defined by other elements</li></ul>DESCRIPTION CONTROL ELEMENT <br /><ul><li>Sources used, rules or conventions, name of the person who prepared or revised, date created or revised</li></ul>IDENTITY ELEMENTS (chapter 2)<br />Reference code <br />Name and Location of Repository<br /> Title <br /> Date<br />Extent<br />Name of Creators <br />Administrative / Biographical history <br />CONTENT AND STRUCTURE ELEMENTS (chapter 3)<br />Scope and content <br />System of arrangement<br />Source: Society of American Archivists., & Hensen, S. L. (2004). Describing archives: A content standard. Chicago: Society of American Archivists. <br />
  60. 60. DACS Finding Aids<br />The required minimum elements are:<br /> 2.1 Reference Code<br /> 2.2 Name and Location of Repository<br /> 2.3 Title<br /> 2.4 Date<br /> 2.5 Extent<br /> 2.6 Name of Creator(s)<br /> 3.1 Scope and Content<br /> 3.2 System of Arrangement<br /> 4.1 Conditions Governing Access<br /> 4.5 Languages and Scripts of the Material<br />Source: http://nwda-db.wsulibs.wsu.edu/findaid/ark:/80444/xv86343<br />
  61. 61. Thank You <br />

×