RDA-FR: the French cataloguing code

1. RDA-FR: the French cataloguing code Elaboration and modellingchoices Annual EURIG Members Meeting 2019 2-3 May 2019, National SzéchényiLibrary, Budapest, Hungary

2. The French position on RDA • 2010 - Publication of RDA • 2012 – Policy report issued by the two French bibliographic agencies: ABES and BnF • Decision NOT to adopt RDA as it was • RDA still needs to evolve to meet its target objectives (linked entities, internationalization) • Adopting RDA would be expensive, counterproductive and could even make the French catalogues go backwards • Keep as high level objective the adoption of RDA and contribute to the evolution of RDA through EURIG • Change the French cataloguing rules • Prepare a new cataloguing code based on the bibliographic models (FR.. Family) in order to be able to do FRBRized cataloguing and to produce native FRBRized metadata • Refer to RDA, but adapt it to the French cataloguing analysis and practice • Prepare the new rules taking into account the priorities of the two bibliographic agencies • Publish the new rules gradually • 2015 – Launch of the French Bibliographic Transition Programme

3. The French Bibliographic Transition Programme BibliographicStrategicCommitteeMinistries of Culture and HigherEducation BnF/ABES SteeringCommittee Dir. BnF/MET et Dir. ABES Collegialtechnical coordination Systems (ILS) & Data Training Standardization « RDA in France »

4. RDA-FR: general guidelines for developing the code FRBR FRAD FRSAD • Drafting of the rulesbased on the French translation of RDA • French analysismaintained in case of major disagreement • Discrepanciesidentified • French examplesadded • Rulespublishedgradually

5. The working groups Working Group TextFrançoise Leresche Working Group Music Frédéric Puyrenier Authority Data for Concepts, Places, Time-Spans Florence Ménard Authority Data for Works and Expressions Frédéric Puyrenier Authority Data for Persons and Families Vincent Boulet Description of Manifestations and Items Mélanie Roche Standardization« RDA en France » Coordination: Françoise Leresche Authority Data for Corporate Bodies AnilaAngjeli RelationshipsbetweenEntities Héloïse Lecomte

6. The French context • 3 major projects referring to the IFLA LRM model • with short deadlines (2022-2023) • French national entities file (FNE) • Shared creation of authority data • between libraries in a first stage • with other cultural institutions (archives, museums, etc.) in the future stages • NOEMI, the next cataloguing system at BnF • New format: Intermarc-NG • Reform of RAMEAU, the French national subject indexing vocabulary, derived from LCSH and Laval

7. What will be the future of RDA-FR? 2019 version

8. What is different from RDA?

9. Preliminary remarks • RDA = code at a genericlevel • Many options • Application profiles and policystatements have to bedefined • RDA-FR = workingtool for French cataloguers • Implementationchoices • Accurate and detailedrules • All kinds of libraryresources • From a certain perspective, RDA-FR canbeconsidered as a French application profile of RDA • With more comprehensiverules • But alsorulesgoing more intodetails • Fromanother perspective, RDA-FR remainsdifferentfrom RDA • Differentschoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model

10. 3 kinds of differences • Different choices in implementing the bibliographic models • Different rules • More accurate and detailed rules

11. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model1 –Whichentities are defined? Objective : prepareentity-oriented catalogues • Principle : 1 entity = 1 type of recordany instance of an entityisdescribed in a distinct record • 6 entities implemented as defined • Work • Expression • Manifestation • Item • Person • Place • 6 sub-entities created • 2 sub-entities of Collective Agent • Family • Corporate Body • 4 sub-entities of Res • Concept • Genre/Form • Event • Cultural event (show: performance, exhibition, etc.) • 2 entities partially implemented • Time-span only for named periods of time(Quaternary, Middle-Age, distinctcenturies, etc.) • Agentfor undifferentiated agents

12. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model 1 – Whichentities are defined? • Entitieswedecided not to implement • Time-spanfor simple dates, regardless of the degree of precision • Dates recorded as attributesof the variousentities(date of creation, date of publication, date of birth, date of death, etc.) • Need to qualifythese dates : nature of the date, reliability of the date, etc. • Nomen • Differentkinds of Nomensrecorded as attributesof the variousentities(preferredname, variant name, identifier, authorizedaccess point, variant access point) • Attributes of Nomenrecorded as meta-metadata • Collective Agent • Useless as the twosub-entitiesCorporate Body and Family are defined

13. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model2 – Scope of the WEMI entities • Some attributes are assigned to different entities • Work • Broad category of production method (still image) : drawing, engraving, photography, photomechanical/digital printing, etc.Any change in the broad category of production method requires the creation of a new work • Expression • Production method (still image) • Some attributes can be assigned to more than one entity • Award (Work / Expression / Manifestation) • Intended Audience (Œuvre / Expression / Manifestation)

14. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model 3 – RelationshipsbetweenAgents and WEMI • Some relationships are associated with different entities • Work - Creator • Creator of a print (still image): generic code for engraver, etcher, lithographer, etc.  Manifestation • Work - Agent associated with a work • Actor (movie) ; Onscreen participant  Expression • Some relationships are categorized in a different way between Creator and Agent associated with a work • Film director: Creator  Agent associated with a work • Editorial director (serial) : Creator  Agent associated with a work • More shortcuts are defined • Work • Creator of aggregated work • Creator of reproduced work (photographs, posters, postcards, etc.) • Creator of source work (prints) • Creator of main work (photographs accompanying a lecture, etc.) • Manifestation • Creator of augmentation

15. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model4 – Description of aggregates • Same analysis according to LRM, divergent choices for the shortcuts • Collection of expressions with creation of an aggregating work and an aggregating expression • Shortcuts for the creators of the works realized in the expressions that are aggregated AggregatingWork creator of aggregate Agent Agent Agent Agent Agent Agent Alternative for is realized by creator of aggregated work etc. AggregatingExpression is embodied by AggregateManifestation

16. Differentchoices in implementing the IFLA LRM model 4 – Description of aggregates • Aggregate manifestation with augmentations • Shortcuts used instead of creating works and expressions of slight interest • Description of the content of the manifestation (as no aggregating expression and work are created) Work • Manifestation attributes (augmentation aggregate) • Content type • Supplementary Content • Illustrative Content Expression is realized by Form of Expression : Text createur ofaugmentation(creator of preface) is embodied by Agent AggregateManifestation Content Type: Text ; Still image Supplementary Content : Bibliography. Index Illustrative Content :Illustrations : coulour Agent creator of augmentation(illustrator)

17. Differentrules1 –Constructingauthorizedaccess points • Constructing authorized access points to represent works and expressions • Authorized access point representing an aggregate of works by the same creator • Conventional collective titles are maintained Sophocle (0496?-0406 av. J. -C.) Théâtre (Lacarrière) • Authorized access point representing a treaty • Authorized access point constructed applying the general rule, i.e. associating the creators and the preferred title of the treaty in the case of bilateral treaties or treaties initiated by international intergovernmental bodies France Allemagne (République fédérale) Traité entre la République française et la République fédérale d'Allemagne sur la coopération franco-allemande. 1963-01-22 Nations Unies Convention sur la diversité biologique. 1992-06-05 • Authorized access point representing an adaptation of a musical work • Musical arrangements : indication of the medium of performance for which the work has been transposed • Transposition in another repertoire

18. Differentrules2 – Differentgranularity of the relationships • Generic level preferred when the information is already present in the related entity Is an adaptation of (work) is an adaptation in another mode of creation of (work) isan adaptation for another audience of (work) isan adaptation for children of (work) • Specific relationships (for certain types of works) • Work Has groundwork/ prepares : relationship between a drawing and another type of work (engraving, painting, medal, etc.) • Expression Other state: relationship between different states of an engraving Has matrix / matrix for: relationship between the printing element and the engraving • Relationships defined for only one entity • The relationships between works are not duplicated between expressions

19. More accurate and detailed rules • All kinds of library resources (still images, cartographic resources, numismatic resources, etc.) • Chapters dedicated to specific resources complementing the general rules for Works et Expressions • Addition of attributes • Expression: Layout (still image); Repertoire (music) • Addition of relationship designators for relationships between Agents and WEMI • Work (Creator) : Medalist ; Curator of an exhibition; creator of sounds recording; etc. • Expression : Text engraver; Collector ; etc. • Manifestations • More detailed rules • Title proper consisting of a common title and a dependent title • Accompanying material • Container with specific content (texts of songs, picture, etc.) • Some elements are defined as independent, when they can apply to different kinds of resources • Tape configuration • Configuration of playback channels • Regional encoding

20. Decisions still pending • Persons and Bibliographic identities • Fictitious entities

21. Conclusion • With the new version of RDA, RDA meets better some of the requirements pointed out by RDA-FR • New RDA elements which correspond to the needs identified by RDA-FR • Expression : Title of Expression ; Medium of performance ; Designation of version • Some French rules also have changed in order to become more compliant to RDA instructions • Musical arrangements created by composers (Liszt, Ravel, etc.) • But some important differences in bibliographic analysis still remain • We have to continue shared work and discussion in order to bring the two codes closer!

22. Thank you!Any question? https://www.transition-bibliographique.fr/rda-fr/regles-publiees/