1. 10/15/11 LIS 4010 October 18, 2011 Assignment A4 Group: Rebecca, Max, Johnny, Holly, Jayna, and Jules Archives Standards: EAD, DACS, and MARC

3. Records can be in a variety of formats (text, images, etc.)

5. Data content (metaphor: the LIQUID inside the bottles): DACS

6. Data format (metaphor: the CRATE carrying the bottles): XML

7. Data exchange (metaphor: the PERSON DELIVERING the crate): OAI( Elings & Waibel article)

11. 10/15/11 DTDs (Document Type Definitions) Define, with their own notations, the structure of a particular type of document 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 Can be thought of as like a template for a particular type of document Example

13. Define the contents and semantics of documents, in addition to their structure (Taylor & Joudrey, p. 145 – 151) Example

14. 10/15/11 Example of EAD Minimum tags required for an EAD file: <ead><eadheader><eadid>...</eadid><filedesc><titlestmt><titleproper>...</titleproper></titlestmt></filedesc></eadheader><archdesclevel = “fonds”><did>...</did><dsc type = “combined”>...</dsc></archdesc></ead> EAD Elements (tags) Examples

15. 10/15/11 Putting It All Together DTD/Schema file (rules) + EAD XML file (actual finding aid) + Style sheet = Human-readable (HTML) output DPL Western History finding aids Princeton University

16. EAD – Advantages Advantages: Allows for effective searching, display, retrieval, and display of information found in archival finding aids The official site of EAD Version 2002 offers a tag library, complete with detailed descriptions of elements. There is a lot of documentation on EAD DTDs and schemas, offering many examples and crosswalks. 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 (From: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article…)

17. EAD – Disadvantages Disadvantages: International use of EAD: non-English speakers are basically expected to understand and apply a standard that is English-oriented Solution: create versions of it for other languages Example: HyTime architectural form processing, which allows language-specific versions of EAD that can be mapped to the English version Content standards for EAD are not agreed upon Significance: affects interoperability Popular toolsets for use on EAD are difficult to use (From: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november99/11pitti.htm & http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article…)

18. Resources Required textbook: Taylor, A.G., & Joudrey, G.N. (2008). The Organization of Information. 3rd ed. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. Articles: Elings, M. W., & Waibel, G. (2007). Metadata for all: Descriptive standards and metadata-sharing across libraries, archives, and museums. First Monday 12 (3). Online resources: http://www.loc.gov/ead/ (EAD Version 2002, Official Site) http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november99/11pitti.htm http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article… http://library.syr.edu/digital/guides/marac/marac.ppt

19. MARC: Machine-Readable Cataloging Record The MARC formats are standards for the representation and communication of bibliographic and related information in machine-readable form. Machine-Readable means that a computer can read and interpret the data in the cataloging record. Cataloging Record means a bibliographic record. This is traditionally the information shown on a catalog card. The record includes but is not limited to: a description of the item main entry and added entries subject headings the classification or call number. Source: Understanding MARC Bibliographic: Machine Readable Cataloging at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/umb/

21. USMARC, originally known as "LCMARC," is the U.S. implementation of the generic standard for the construction of communication formats.

22. Other countries developed their own MARC formats such as CAN/MARC and UKMARC

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. In 2002, the Library of Congress developed the MARC-XML schema as an alternative record structure, allowing MARC records to be represented in XML.Source: Standards for Archival Description: A Handbook at: http://www.archivists.org/catalog/stds99/index.html MARC21 FAQ at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html Wikipedia: MARC Standards at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARC_standards

26. The primary standards used for the exchange of information about archives and manuscripts are:

27. USMARC Format for Archival and Manuscripts Control (USMARC AMC)

28. Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts: A Cataloging Manual for Archives, Historical Societies, and Manuscript Libraries (APPM)..

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. 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.Sources: Standards for Archival Description: A Handbook at: http://www.archivists.org/catalog/stds99/index.html A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology at: http://www.archivists.org/glossary/index.asp

32. There are several robust software systems that support creating and managing MARC records.

33. Connection to well defined content standards such as AACR2 and APPM.Source: Scurlock Photographs Cataloging Analysis www.adammathes.com/academic/archives/eadscurlock.html

34. Weaknesses 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. MARC is a complex system, extensive knowledge and specialized cataloging software is often required create and understand records. MARC generally lacks the tools to represent the inherent hierarchy in archival collections. Narrow domain- MARC is an application specific format compared to general technology like XML. Source: Scurlock Photographs Cataloging Analysis www.adammathes.com/academic/archives/eadscurlock.html

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.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

37. Typicalvideorecordingin card format: Typicalvideorecordingin card format: TH9148The Adventures of Safety Frog. Fire safety[videorecording] / Century 21 Video, Inc. -- Van Nuys, Calif. : AIMS Media, 1988. 1 videocassette (10 min.) : sd., col. ; 1/2 in. Cataloged from contributor's data. VHS. Audience: Elementarygrades. Issuedalsoasmotionpicture. 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) 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] Dewey Class no.: 613.6 -- dc 11 89-711816 MARC

38. The same record with MARC 21 content designators: Leader *****ngm 22*****1a 4500 001 89711816 003 DLC 005 19891107152635.3 007 vfcbaho 008 890719s1988 cau010 c v1eng c 010 ## $a 8911816 020 ## $c For sale ($195.00) or rent ($50.00) 040 ## $a AIMS Media 050 10 $a TH9148 082 10 $a 613.6 $2 11 245 04 $a The Adventures of Safety Frog. $p Fire safety $h [videorecording] / $c Century 21 Video, Inc. 246 30 $a Fire safety $h [videorecording] 260 ## $a Van Nuys, Calif. : $b AIMS Media, $c 1988. 300 ## $a 1 videocassette (10 min.) : $b sd., col. ; $c 1/2 in. 500 ## $a Cataloged from contributor's data. 538 ## $a VHS. 521 ## $a Elementarygrades. 530 ## $a Issuedalsoasmotionpicture. 520 ## $a SafetyFrogteacheschildren to be firesafe, explainingthatsmartkidsnever play with matches. She shows howsmoke detectors work and explainswhythey are necessary. Shealso describeshow to avoidhouseholdaccidents thatlead to fires and how to stop, drop, and rollifclothing catches fire. 650 #0 $a Fireprevention $v Juvenilefilms. 650 #0 $a Fire detectors $v Juvenilefilms. 650 #0 $a Dwellings $x Fires and fireprevention $v Juvenilefilms. 650 #0 $a Puppet films. 650 #1 $a Fireprevention. 650 #1 $a Safety. 710 2# $a Century 21 Video, Inc. 710 2# $a AIMS Media. Source: Understanding MARC: Marc21 Reference Materials at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/umb/um11to12.html

39. MARC EXAMPLEFULL LEVEL RECORD - THREE-DIMENSIONAL ITEM Leader/00-23 *****crm##22*****#a#4500 001 <control number> 003 <control number identifier> 005 19920902031155.0 008/00-39 870119q18601869xxunnn############rn####d 040 ##$a[organization code]$c[organization code] 043 ##$an-us--- 045 ##$aw6w6 050 14$aE468.9$b.C3 245 00$a[Cannon ball]$h[realia]. 260 ##$c[186-]$e(United States :$f[s.n.]) 300 ##$a1 cannon ball :$blead, gray ;$c10 cm. in diam. 500 ##$aTitle supplied by cataloger. 520 ##$a"12-pounder" cannon ball used in the Civil War. 650 #0$aOrdnance. #0$aUnited States$xHistory$yCivil War, 1861-1865. Source: MARC21 Bibliographic – Full Record Examples at: http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/examples.html

40. Describing Archives: A Content StandardDACS 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. Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.

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. Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.

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) 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. 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). Source: ODLIS http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/searchODLIS.aspx

43. DACS is divided into three parts "Describing Archival Materials," "Describing Creators," and "Forms of Names” DACS also includes a glossary, a list of companion standards, and crosswalks to APPM, ISAD(G), ISAAR(CPF), MARC 21, and EAD. Source: ODLIS http://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/searchODLIS.aspx

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. 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. Source: Society of American Archivists http://www.archivists.org/governance/standards/dacs.asp.

45. Strengths DACSis a flexiblestandard ~ allows for sound professional judgment in the context of a specific repository’s collections and users Output Neutrality ~ Separation of content and carrier Content vs. Context ~ Separation of descriptive content from historical or biographical context. Multi-Level of description ~ can have many levels of description No Abbreviations ~ which is more user friendly for non- English speaking people. Creatorship ~ a creator can be a person, family, or body that assembled and/or maintained and used records in the conduct of personal or corporate activity. No Artificial Collections ~ materials gathered by a person or family for some purpose rather than gathered organically 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

46. Weaknesses Need to simplify records and tailor resource description to both users and the materials ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Only Used by the U.S.A archival community ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Needs to have a bolder approach to serve the digital era ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ So many other content standards to work from that it is aa blessing and a curse. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 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

47. The Future 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) DACS will be seen as a smaller and more focused implementation of RDA 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. 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 RDA’s website: http://www.rdaonline.org/

49. Physical access

50. Technical Access

51. Conditions Governing Reproduction and Use

52. Languages and Scripts of the Material

54. Immediate Source of Acquisition

55. Appraisal, Destruction, and Scheduling Information

57. Existence and location of copies

58. Related archival materials

60. DACS Finding Aids The required minimum elements are: 2.1 Reference Code 2.2 Name and Location of Repository 2.3 Title 2.4 Date 2.5 Extent 2.6 Name of Creator(s) 3.1 Scope and Content 3.2 System of Arrangement 4.1 Conditions Governing Access 4.5 Languages and Scripts of the Material Source: http://nwda-db.wsulibs.wsu.edu/findaid/ark:/80444/xv86343

61. Thank You