top of page

Chapter 5. Foundations of Resource Description

Chapter Outline

  • Introduction

  • Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR)

  • Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD)

  • Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD)

  • Original RDA

  • IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM)

  • Official RDA

  • International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD)

  • RDA and MARC

  • RDA and BIBFRAME​

Key Takeaways

Chapter 5 takes a more detailed look at current conceptual models and resource description guidelines for the creation of descriptive bibliographic data. This chapter also provides the context for using the RDA: Resource Description and Access cataloging guidelines.

Conceptual models

Like other models, a bibliographic conceptual model is an abstract, top-level, representation of the bibliographic universe. It describes the context where this model can be applied and identifies the entities involved and their inter-relationships. A conceptual model can be more detailed and go on to identify attributes and value sources while also providing guidelines for implementation. A bibliographic conceptual model is not a set of rules on how to describe an information resource or provide access to the resource and its content.

User tasks

For the bibliographic universe and its conceptual model to be functional, it must be designed to support user activities, including interactions with the resulting system in users' quests to resolve their information needs. The terms catalog objectives, the functions of the catalog, and user tasks have been used over the years to describe the main activities carried out by a person using a service or retrieval system for resource discovery.

Entities &  relationships

Bibliographic conceptual models are most often entity-relationship (ER) models. ER models describe interrelated things of interest in a specific domain of knowledge, specifying entity types and relationships that can exist between the entities. Entities are abstract classes of conceptual objects, representing the key objects of interest in a model. For example, in the bibliographic universe, a person is one type of entity that can be linked through the authorship relationship with a work, another type of entity. 

Attributes & elements

To identify or describe an entity and differentiate it from other similar entities, several entity characteristics can be used. An information community, model, or standards defines the attributes, often as metadata elements, needed to support the user tasks and the functions of a retrieval and discovery system. For example, the year a book was published is a characteristic that can be recorded in a "publication date" element defined in a standard of resource description.

Digital Network

Chapter 5 Exercise

Can you identify the entity?

coming soon

Chapter References/Notes

  1. American Library Association, Canadian Library Association, Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (Great Britain), & Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA. (2010). RDA: Resource description & access. Chicago, IL: American Library Association

  2. IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2009). Functional requirements for bibliographic records, Final report. München, Germany: K. G. Saur. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf

  3. IFLA Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2013). Functional requirements for authority data: A conceptual model. München, Germany: K. G. Saur. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frad/frad_2013.pdf

  4. IFLA Working Group on the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2011). Functional requirements for subject authority data (FRSAD): A conceptual model. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Saur. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/classification-and-indexing/functional-requirements-for-subject-authority-data/frsad-final-report.pdf

  5. IFLA Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR), International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2013). Functional requirements for authority data: A conceptual model. München, Germany: K. G. Saur. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frad/frad_2013.pdf

  6. RDA Toolkit. (2010). RDA background. Retrieved from http://www.rdatoolkit.org/background

  7. Riva, P., LeBoeuf, P., and Žumer, M. (2017). IFLA library reference model (p. 10). Retrieved from https://repository.ifla.org/bitstream/123456789/40/1/ifla-lrm-august-2017_rev201712.pdf

  8. Riva, LeBoeuf, Zumer, 2017, p. 19

  9. Riva, LeBoeuf, Zumer, 2017, p. 86

  10. Riva, LeBoeuf, Zumer, 2017, p. 74

  11. RDA Steering Committee. (n.d.). RDA frequently asked questions. Retrieved from http://rda-rsc.org/content/rda_faq

  12. IFLA Cataloguing Section and ISBD Review Group, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2011). International standard bibliographic description (ISBD) (Consolidated ed.; IFLA series on bibliographic control, Vol. 44). München, Germany: De Gruyter Saur. Retrieved from http://www.ifla.org/publications/international-standard-bibliographic-description

  13. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2022 February). International standard bibliographic description: 2021 update to the 2011 consolidated edition. Retrieved from https://repository.ifla.org/bitstream/123456789/1939/1/ISBD_Update%202021%20to%20Consolidated %20ed%202011.pdf

  14. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2022, May 25). Release of the 2021 Update to the 2011 Consolidated Edition of the ISBD. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/news/release-of-the-2021-update-to-the-2011-consolidated-edition-of-the-isbd/

  15. American Library Association, Canadian Federation of Library Associations, and CLIP: Charted Institute of Library and Information Professionals. (2022, June 24). Maps for use with RDA Vocabularies. RDA Registry. Retrieved from http://www.rdaregistry.info/Maps/#isbdrda

  16. American Library Association, Canadian Federation of Library Associations, and CLIP: Charted Institute of Library and Information Professionals. (2020). RDA alignments. RDA Registry. Retrieved from http://www.rdaregistry.info/Aligns/alignISBD2RDA.html

  17. Berman, S. (1977). The cataloging shtik. Library Journal, 102(11), 1251–1253

  18. Freedman, M. J. (1977). Public libraries, the Library of Congress, and the National Bibliographic Network. Library Journal, 102(19), 2211–2219

  19. Gorman, M., & Hotsinpiller, J. (1979). ISBD: Aid or barrier to understanding? College & Research Libraries, 40(6), 519–526

  20. Library of Congress (2022). BIBFRAME January 2022 update forum. Retrieved from https://www.loc.gov/bibframe/news/bibframe-update-mw2022.html

 

Additional Readings

Here, you will find readings specific to the contents of this chapter.

You may find more readings about similar topics on the Cataloging and Classification Web Resources page

​FRBR, FRAD, FRSAD, and LRM

  • Billey, A. (2019). "Just because we can, doesn’t mean we should: An argument for simplicity and data privacy with name authority work in the linked data environment." Journal of Library Metadata, 19(1-2), 1-17, DOI: 10.1080/19386389.2019.1589684

  • IFLA. (n.d.). IFLA's bibliographic conceptual models. IFLA. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/g/cataloguing/ifla-s-bibliographic-conceptual-models/

  • Riva, P. Le Boeuf, P. and Žumer, M. (2017 August). IFLA Library Reference Model: A conceptual model for bibliographic information. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA). Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/assets/cataloguing/frbr-lrm/ifla-lrm-august-2017.pdf

  • Salaba, A., & Zhang, Y. (2007). From a conceptual model to application and system development. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 33(6), 17-23.   

  • Seikel, M. and Steele, T. (2020). Comparison of key entities within bibliographic conceptual models and implementations: Definitions, evolution, and relationships. American Library Association, Library Resources & Technical Services. Retrieved from DOI: https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.64n2.62

  • Tillett, B. (2004). “What is FRBR? A conceptual model for the bibliographic universe.” Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/cds/downloads/FRBR.PDF

  • Zhang, Y. (2007). Introduction to the special issue on FRBR. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 33(6), 6.   

  • Zhang, Y., & Salaba, A. (2007). Critical issues and challenges facing FRBR research and practice. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 33(6), 30-31.

  • Žumer, M. (2018). IFLA Library Reference Model (IFLA LRM): Harmonisation of the FRBR Family. Knowledge Organization, 45(4), 310-8. Also available in Hjørland, Birger and Gnoli, Claudio eds., ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization, http://https://www.isko.org/cyclo/lrm

​

RDA, MARC and BIBFRAME
bottom of page