Riva, P.; Oliver, C.: Evaluation of RDA as an implementation of FRBR and FRAD (2012)
0.00
0.0033721137 = product of:
0.0067442274 = sum of:
0.0067442274 = product of:
0.020232681 = sum of:
0.020232681 = weight(_text_:j in 1918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020232681 = score(doc=1918,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14407988 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.04534384 = queryNorm
0.14042683 = fieldWeight in 1918, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1774964 = idf(docFreq=5010, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1918)
0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- RDA, Resource Description and Access, is based on the foundation of the original entity-relationship statements of the conceptual models FRBR and FRAD. RDA not only uses the vocabulary of entities, attributes and relationships, as well as the user tasks, described in the models, these concepts also form an integral feature of its structure at both the macro level (the organisation of the sections and chapters of RDA reflects the models) and at a more detailed level within chapters. This paper reviews the degree of alignment of RDA with FRBR and FRAD, covering the areas of user tasks, entities, attributes, and relationships, and discusses the divergences of greater or lesser significance which exist. The FRBR user tasks are almost identical to the corresponding RDA tasks, but in RDA the wording and naming of tasks corresponding to the FRAD user tasks is reoriented towards the point of view of the end user. RDA adopts the bibliographic entities, but does not treat the FRAD entities name, identifier, or controlled access point as entities in their own right, even though the essence of the FRAD model of authority control is integrated into RDA. RDA's data elements can generally be traced back to attributes defined in either FRBR or FRAD, although at times at a greater level of granularity. The FRBR primary relationships are all included in RDA, but a direct link between work and manifestation is also defined in RDA with the work manifested relationship. RDA takes steps towards the harmonisation of the separate models, some obvious, such as adding the entity family to group 2 and using the FRAD definition of the entities person and corporate body, others less so, for instance in harmonising the different treatment of relationships among group 1 entities in the organisation of the relationship designators in appendix J. The ways in which RDA implements both FRBR and FRAD into a single content standard, as well as the ways in which RDA diverges from the models, may provide valuable insights for the consolidation of the FRBR family of conceptual models.
