Encoding Standards Subcommittee Report: MLA 2017

MUSIC LIBRARY ASSOCIATION
CATALOGING AND METADATA COMMITTEE
Encoding Standards Subcommittee
Business Meeting
Thursday, February 23, 2017, 3:30-4:55pm
Salon 5, Rosen Plaza Hotel, Orlando
MINUTES

Attendees: Jim Soe Nyun, Margaret Corby, Thom Pease, Matthew Wise, Karen Peters, Anne Adams, Hermine Vermeij, Keith Knop, Karla Jurgemeyer, Nancy Lorimer, Catherine Busselen, Mark Scharff, , Chris Holden, Kimmy Szeto, Jay Weitz (OCLC representative), Damian Iseminger (LC representative proxy)
Absent: Morgan Cundiff and Steve Yusko (LC Representatives)

1) Meeting called to order at 3:33pm.

2) Welcome and introductions of the subcommittee members were made and an audience roster was sent around.

3) There were no adjustments to the agenda.

4) Encoding Standards Chair’s report (Soe Nyun)
a. ALA Liaison Reports
i. Annual 2016 (Orlando) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7wsl3doYbMKQlotUkZXS0l4Qms/view?usp=sharing)
ii. Midwinter 2017 (Atlanta) (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxViFaIR72G1YWV1MWtsSHBia0/view?usp=sharing)
iii. Highlights from Midwinter, big metadata standards committee (i.e. ALCTS, RUSA, …) won’t be looking at individual ontologies; CCDA had interesting discussion paper dealing with disabilities, working with OLAC on this
b. Jim gave thanks to outgoing members Matthew Wise and Karla Jurgenmeyer; Deb Morris resigned her position in August 2016.
c. Call for new members was put out.
d. At the CMC Town Hall there will be some more information that will be of interest to us but perhaps not directly related to encoding standards as well as some other sessions (i.e. It’s Happening Now and Kimmy Szeto’s session)

5) Library of Congress Liaisons report (Iseminger on behalf of Cundiff and Yusko)
a. BIBFRAME 1.0 Pilot Project is wrapping up; LC catalogers are still entering data in BIBFRAME 1.0.
b. Any development of BIBFRAME 2.0 will have to cease May 2017 in order to allow time to develop tools and train, beginning in June.
c. Five catalogers at LC, 4 at the Packard campus, and 2 representatives from Moving Image are involved in this work.
d. Caitlyn Hunter is involved in LD4P.

6) OCLC Liaisons report (Weitz)
a. Highlights from report:
i. OCLC announced the acquisition of Relais Internationale.
ii. OCLC introduction Tipasa, cloud-based replacement for ILLiad.
iii. 15 libraries chosen for SmartSpaces Project (ARSL).

7) Updates on MARC development this year (Soe Nyun)
a. Three proposals that passed at ALA Annual, published as a part of MARC Update 72, should be implemented by OCLC with next cycle.
i. 2016-07, Defining Subfield $3 in Field 382 of the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format (http://www.loc.gov/marc/mac/2016/2016-07.html)
ii. 2016-08, Redefining Code Values in Field 008/20 (Format of Music) in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format (http://www.loc.gov/marc/mac/2016/2016-08.html)
iii. 2016-09, Recording Distributor Number for Music and Moving Image Materials in the MARC 21 Bibliographic Format (http://www.loc.gov/marc/mac/2016/2016-09.html). Required update to 028 and  037
b. Updates to the examples in the documentation for the Bibliographic and Authority formats for Field 382 to make them align better with current practice were accepted and are now reflected in the MARC documentation.
c. “Fast-track” proposal to make Field 384, Key repeatable. Started out with Belgium … but they could not continue it, it was suggested that MLA take it on. This one is currently in the works. A first draft of the proposal has been received favorably by the MARC Steering Committee. Before finalizing the proposal we may want to look at adding $3 to at least the bibliographic format..
i. How does “Fast-track” process work. Matthew Wise gave explanation. Representatives from LC, international community and MARC Advisory Committee review and approve. Developed so that steering
group members and members of the advisory committee could get relatively simple and non-controversial changes through in a timely manner. If something doesn’t get passed it could go through regular process.
ii. Question about whether someone could misinterpret repeatability of key to mean that it could apply to key changes within the work. Answer: Best practices should address that.
d. Earlier recommendation that we come up with some way to give provenance of metadata to the 382 field. 883 Provenance of Data was brought forward as a possibility. It is no longer on Encoding Standards plate but it may be part of another CMS subcommittee’s work (Vocabulary). Question about removal of this information if it has been vetted by a person later. Matthew Wise recommended looking back at MARBI papers about this topic for context.

8) Ongoing project: Maintaining and Developing Music Metadata Resources Site
a. Changes made to the site this year. Google spreadsheet is being used to track changes made. Added a few new things and has a few things left to do after membership changes have been made. (Jurgenmeyer)
b. Time for a major reexamination and reorganization of the site? Is it worth charging a working group to look at this. (Soe Nyun)
i. Suggestion to put links at the bottom in alphabetical order (Jurgenmeyer)
ii. Suggestion that if something doesn’t make sense on the current platform, it should be changed to make it work with the new platform. (Kimmy Szeto)
iii. Elizabeth will be in touch with Katie about new way of doing feeds that will need to be implemented, she will be in touch with the Encoding Standards (Snyder)
c. New leader needed for this task (Soe Nyun)
i. This will be an opportunity for next year.

9) Stalled work on MADS update proposal: Are we still interested in pursuing this? (Soe Nyun)
a. We decided to continue working on this. We are about 90% done but need to wrap it up and send something to LC. Jim will let MADS Steering Committee know that we will continue working on it.

10) Linked Data for Performed Music (LD4PM) sub-project of Linked Data 4 Production (LD4P).
a. Talking to vendors, ILS people, etc. looking at how one does linked data in a collaborative environment. Each institution has its own sub-projects, as well. BIBFRAME is meant to be a lightweight framework and to utilize it requires that extensions be created to make useful. Stanford is currently working with Cassalini Libri and will be able to do vendor cataloging by the end of April. Other projects include cartographic, rare, special collections, LPs. LD4PM is an ontology extension. They have been using some existing vocabularies but also creating own vocabularies as needed. Working on modeling relationships between works, medium of performance and events. They are hoping to be finished with a preliminary basis of the ontology by June 2017. Will ask community for feedback. Working with MLA and ARSC and have representatives from Stanford, MLA, ARSC, and LC. Should be fully compatible with RDA but it does not have to be used with RDA. (Lorimer)
b. Question: Are there other content standards with which they have been looking at making it compatible? Answer: It is supposed to be neutral but in practice that isn’t really possible; looking at doing DACS, but do not know of any other content standards to make it compatible with.
c. Question: Have they been addressing sequencing? Yes, looking at this now. Recommendation that PBCore community may be interested in working together on these discussions.
d. Timetable is up in the air but projects will be coming out of this with opportunities for input in the long-term. Nancy Lorimer has a draft in Web Protege, let her know if you want to take a look at it.

11) New business and work for the coming year, including any further work we might want to do on the  MARC formats (All)
a. Fast-track project
b. Cleaning-up MMR site
c. Possible analysis of 3xx fields lacking Subfield $3?
i. Interest has been expressed by MAC to do an analysis of what other communities would benefit from these. Our group could do that analysis.
ii. We can think about what can drift down from whole to part/inheritance with authorities work being done. This may not be a different issue in LRM per Kathy Glennan; MADS also has significant problems in this area, we may want to consider this at same time; content standards may need to have some input as well.
d. Work with linked data/BIBFRAME? MADS work? Nancy Lorimer said that BIBFRAME may change the way MADS deals with titles.
e. Other possibilities? Is there a need to incorporate medium of performance into MODS? Mapping out what areas of MARC are less parsable than others. December 2016 issue of Journal of Library Metadata has article by Jay Weitz that may be interesting in this context.

12) Adjournment at 1:59PM.