바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.33 No.1
Citation Share

A Study on the Display Considerations of RDA Resource Type

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management / Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, (P)1013-0799; (E)2586-2073
2016, v.33 no.1, pp.33-52
https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2016.33.1.033

(2016). A Study on the Display Considerations of RDA Resource Type. Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management, 33(1), 33-52, https://doi.org/10.3743/KOSIM.2016.33.1.033
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

This study was to find the display considerations of RDA resource type - content type, media type, and carrier type. The Literature review, the case study, and the survey were used as the research method. 5 display strategies were suggested in this study. First, content and carrier types were better displayed than all 3 types of RDA resources. Second, two kinds of algorithm should be considered for RDA resource icon display. One was the combination of the terms of carrier types plus content types icon. The other was the combination of carrier types icon and content types icon in which the terms reflecting types must be included. Third, the subfield of 33x must be used for the paired display of content type and carrier type of multi-types resources. Fourth, in brief display, resource type icon was better positioned on the left and upper side and in detailed display, resource types were better located in description area. Fifth, ‘format’ was used as display indication phrase. This study would contribute to the design for the resource display by suggesting the practical display considerations of RDA resource type.

keywords
일반자료유형, 자원유형, 내용유형, 매체유형, 수록매체유형, 자원기술 및 접근, 서지레코드의 기능적 요건, 하이브리드레코드, 온라인목록 디스플레이, RDA 자원유형 디스플레이, GMD, resource type, content type, media type, carrier type, Resource Description and Access, FRBR, hybrid records, OPAC display, RDA resource type display

Reference

1.

국립중앙도서관. (2014). 한국문헌자동화목록형식. http://www.nl.go.kr/common/jsp/kormarc_2014/index.html.

2.

이미화. (2011). KCR4 GMD 및 SMD 기술의 새로운 방안 모색. 한국도서관·정보학회지, 42(2), 237-255.

3.

이미화. (2011). RDA 자원유형의 KCR4 적용에 관한 연구. 정보관리학회지, 28(3), 103-121.

4.

Blythe, K. C.. (2013). Resource Description and Access: It’s really not so bad. Serials Review, 39, 175-180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.serrev.2013.07.008.

5.

Caudle, D. M.. (2014). Keep it simple: Using RDA’s content, media, and carrier type fields to simplify format display issues. Journal of Library Metadata, 14, 222-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2014.984572.

6.

Cronin, C.. (2011). From testing to implementation: Managing full-scale RDA adoption at the University of Chicago. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 49, 626-646. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2011.616263.

7.

El-Sherbini, M.. (2011). Resource description and access “RDA": New code for cataloging. The Serials Librarian, 60, 7-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361526x.2011.556425.

8.

Hider, P.. (2009). A comparison between the RDA taxonomies and end-user categorizations of content and carrier. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 47(6), 544-560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639370902929755.

9.

JSC for Development of RDA. RDA : Resource Description and Access.

10.

Library of Congress. Network Development and MARC Standards Office. (2015). MARC21 format for bibliographic data. https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic.

11.

Library of Congress, Program for Cooperative Cataloging, Post-implementation Hybrid Bibliographic Records Guidelines Task Group. (2013). Report of the PCC Post-Implementation Hybrid Bibliographic Records Guidelines Task Group. https://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/rda/RDA%20Task%20groups%20and%20charges/Hybrid-Report-Sept-2011.pdf.

12.

McCutcheon, S.. (2011). RDA testing in triplicate: Kent State University’s experiences with RDA testing. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 49, 607-625. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2011.616262.

13.

McCutcheon, S.. (2012). RDA and the reference librarian: What to expect from the new cataloging standard. Reference Librarian, 53, 123-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2011.607409.

14.

McCutcheon, S.. (2012). Innovative millennium RDA display issues: MARC tags 264 and 336-338 (-). Paper presented at EGL IUG.

15.

OCLC. (2013). OCLC RDA policy statement. http://oclc.org/rda/newpolicy.en.htm.

16.

Ou, C.. (2014). Displaying content, media, and carrier types in the OPAC: questions and considerations. Journal of Library Metadata, 14, 229-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2014.990846.

17.

Panchyshyn, R. S.. (2014). RDA display and the general material designation: an innovative solution. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 52(5), 487-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2014.902893.

18.

U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee. (2011). Report and recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test Coordinating Committee. http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/rda/rdatesting-finalreport-20june2011.pdf.

Journal of the Korean Society for Information Management

e-Submission OA Policy