RDA is here whether we want it or not.
As yet my library system has chosen not to implement RDA. However, seemingly we will not be able to hold out forever…
To all those libraries who are using RDA – I have some questions. The most important of which is this:
“Does RDA cataloguing benefit the patron? In what way?”
We must remember that the whole reason for cataloging in the first place is to enhance access for our end users. We do this by being consistent and thinking of the patron’s needs and wants.
Our library has an excellent catalogue with an AquaBrowser overlay. In my opinion it offers patrons an easy-to-use, comprehensive catalogue with optimized use of icons and graphics. How can RDA improve this? Will it really….?
How does spelling out the word pages or sound benefit the end user?In this day of prevalent social media which uses abbreviations more than we ever have in the past, why are we stopping the use of abbreviations in our catalogues?
Are libraries jumping on the RDA bandwagon like lemmings? Why? Has the worldwide library community invested so much time and money in the implementation of RDA that they now feel obliged to keep it for those reasons only?
RDA provides instructions and guidelines for formulating data for resource description and discovery. I would argue that we describe our resources very well without RDA and that the patrons can discover/access it easily and efficiently. Hence the name of our catalogue “Discover“.
How does it benefit the end user to change an author authority record from:
Sandford, John, 1944 Feb. 23- to
Sandford, John, 1944 February 23-
Really… what patron would care if this change were made? Does this authority change enhance access? Isn’t access the reason we catalogue in the first place?
If it ain’t broke…. don’t fix it.
The views and opinions expressed in this blog posting are my own and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of my employer.