Record Creation for Graceling by Kristin Cashore

Part I Record Creation

Simple Dublin Core Element

Resource Values












Katsa lives in a land of seven kingdoms, where people graced with special abilities are marked by their mismatched eye color. As a child, it is determined that her ability is to kill quickly and expertly, and as an adult Katsa becomes the executioner and enforcer to her uncle, King Randa, due to her amazing fighting skills. Katsa hates her role, and creates a Council to fight the injustices around her. While on a secret rescue mission, Katsa meets Po, another graceling with his own powers attempting to free his grandfather from the king of Monsea. Katsa and Po journey to unravel the dark secrets of King Leck of Monsea, while they learn more about themselves and their abilities along the way.

This story is about discovering life, love and the ironies of both. The main character sees herself as a killer, only to realize that her grace has nothing to do with death and everything to do with life.


Table of Contents: 1. The Lady Killer. 2. The Twisted King. 3. The Shifting World.




Kristin Cashore


Harcourt, Inc.


Copyright 2008, Kristin Cashore. All rights reserved.






Book 471p.







Explanation of Dublin Core Elements of Name and Value Pairs

            There are fifteen Dublin Core elements, of which I determined eleven specific elements to be applicable to record the book Graceling by Kristin Cashore. Each selected element creates a standard record for the item being cataloged, and unselected elements are excluded because descriptors do not apply. Elements can be categorized by content, ownership, and presentation of the resource.

Several of the elements used in the record creation are related to the content of the resource. The title element reflects the name of the information resource, and is a required element to any Dublin Core metadata as every item cataloged into a database will have a title. The subject element reflects the topic of the resource, and is also a required element as every item can be classified by the resource subject matter. The description element is an abstract of the purpose of the resource, and can also include the resources table of contents.  The language element specifies the language of the text within the resource, which in this instance is English.

Elements that reflect ownership of the resource indicate responsible parties for the development and publishing of the resource. The creator element reflects the author of the book, as she is responsible for creating the resource. The publisher element indicates the name of the publishing company, Harcourt Inc. The rights element reflects who has ownership of the copyright of the resource, which in this instance is the author, Kristin Cashore.

Elements that indicate the presentation of the resource refer to when the resource was made available and what present form the resource is being cataloged in. The date element indicates when the material was released for purchase. The type element indicates structure, which for this resource is text. The format element is listed as a 471 page book, and describes the physical form of the resource. The identifier element is a unique combination of numbers and/or letters used to identify the resource based on formal identification systems in practice.

Repeated Elements

            The elements that are beneficial to repeat for clarity on this resource are subject and description elements. The subject descriptors include journeys, magic, fantasy, and fiction. These descriptors are all available to cross reference through a thesaurus, and each individual descriptor specifies the overall subject of the book. The story is a work of fiction that is fantastic in nature, with characters journeying from one location to another encountering magic as they go. Having one entry for the subject element would be limiting and not general enough. Searching for this item could be referenced through any of these subjects, and eliminating any of them could limit the response of a catalog search.

            The description elements are repeated to include an abstract and the table of contents. The abstract provides an overview of the resource, for evaluation of whether the contents of the resource meet the user’s needs. The table of contents indicates the organization of the resource, in this case that the story is divided into three parts. It clarifies the material’s overall organization.

Deleted Elements

There were several elements that are not included in the record for the book Graceling. The excluded elements include contributors, source, relation, and coverage. The contributor element is excluded as there are no other people or organizations that made significant intellectual contributions to the book besides the creator Kristin Cashore. The source element is not part of the table due to the present resource being in its original form, and it is not a second resource of itself. The relation element is excluded from the element list as the book is not an edition of another work, nor a chapter or translation. Coverage elements are not included due to the lack of spatial or temporal characteristics within the contents of the book, and there are no physical regions or place names that are familiar to use because the story location is fictitious. Each of these elements did not apply for recording the book, and so including them would not have been logical or properly descriptive of the book itself. 














Part II Standards Evaluation


Graceling / Kristin Cashore.



LC Control No.:


LCCN Permalink:


01097cam a2200241 a 450






071228s2008 flub d 000 1 eng


__ |a 7 |b cbc |c orignew |d 1 |e ecip |f 20 |g y-gencatlg


0_ |a acquire |b 2 shelf copies |x policy default


__ |a lb10 2007-12-28 |i lb10 2007-12-28 |e lb10 2007-12-28 to cip |a ps04 2008-08-19 2 copies rec’d., to CIP ver.; |f lg13 2008-08-25 to SL; |g lg13 2008-08-25 (overtime) sent 2 Copies to BCCD


__ |a 2007045436


__ |a 9780152063962 (hbk.)


__ |a DLC |c DLC |d DLC


00 |a PZ7.C26823 |b Gr 2008


00 |a [Fic] |2 22


1_ |a Cashore, Kristin.


10 |a Graceling / |c Kristin Cashore.


__ |a Orlando, FL : |b Harcourt, |c 2008.


__ |a 471 p. : |b map ; |c 21 cm.


__ |a Companion book to Fire.


__ |a In a world where some people are born with extreme and often-feared skills called Graces, Katsa struggles for redemption from her own horrifying Grace, the Grace of killing, and teams up with another young fighter to save their land from a corrupt king.


_1 |a Fantasy.




PZ7.C26823 Gr 2008 FT MEADE


Copy 2

— Request in:

Jefferson or Adams Building Reading Rooms – STORED OFFSITE


— Status:

c.2 Overdue – Due on 10-02-2012



PZ7.C26823 Gr 2008 FT MEADE


Copy 1

— Request in:

Jefferson or Adams Building Reading Rooms – STORED OFFSITE


— Status:

Not Charged

Full Record

Graceling / Kristin Cashore.



LC control no.:


LCCN permalink:

Type of material:

Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)

Personal name:

Cashore, Kristin.

Main title:

Graceling / Kristin Cashore.


Orlando, FL : Harcourt, 2008.


471 p. : map ; 21 cm.


9780152063962 (hbk.)


In a world where some people are born with extreme and often-feared skills called Graces, Katsa struggles for redemption from her own horrifying Grace, the Grace of killing, and teams up with another young fighter to save their land from a corrupt king.




Companion book to Fire.

LC classification:

PZ7.C26823 Gr 2008

Dewey class no.:





PZ7.C26823 Gr 2008 FT MEADE


Copy 2

— Request in:

Jefferson or Adams Building Reading Rooms – STORED OFFSITE


— Status:

c.2 Overdue – Due on 10-02-2012



PZ7.C26823 Gr 2008 FT MEADE


Copy 1

— Request in:

Jefferson or Adams Building Reading Rooms – STORED OFFSITE


— Status:

Not Charged



Part II B Metadata of Graceling

            Cataloging generally includes the contents of the title page, leaving resources that do not contain a title page uncataloged or poorly represented (Yee, 2007, p. 312). Creating records that include the relationships between separate and seemingly disparate records is a challenge that is explored in Dublin Core, and is largely unaddressed in Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC). When defining categories of networked electronic resources, Dublin Core has become the most widely accepted proposed standard according to Nair & Jeevan (2004) because the ability to address the unique relationships between electronic resources. Margaritopoulos et al. describes the Dublin Core as multivalued, with each element having specific value to metadata completeness. This completeness of metadata examines the ability to describe a resource including all of its potential properties (Margaritopoulos et al., 2012, p. 724.)

Access Points of Graceling

            Core bibliographic elements are available for every resource that can be input into a catalog or database. According to Lee and Jacob (2011), the elements that record title, author, subject and description are vital to a complete bibliographic profile of any resource and are available for every resource. Every resource originates from an individual or organization that is responsible for the intellectual content, and is representationally titled in some manner. The resource will also always address some subject matter, and can further be described by the medium it is available in. These common elements can be used to create metadata information for any resource, and the lack of any of these elements can adversely affect the quality of the metadata completeness.

Representation of Graceling

            When determining the four most important descriptive access points for surrogate records for the book Graceling, the different elements of DC and MARC were evaluated for core bibliographic elements. Dublin Core elements that reflect these core bibliographic elements include title, creator, subject, and format. MARC elements that reflect the same core bibliographic elements include Main Title (245), Personal name (100), Subjects (650), and Description (300).

Similarities in Standards

            Dublin Core and MARC standards share similar intentions. Both standards create metadata in a consistent and normalized format. Dublin Core and MARC standards for Graceling are similar to each other in that the entered values are the same for each of the core elements. The entered values for title in Dublin Core and main title in MARC both have the entry of Graceling. The Dublin Core creator, subject, and format elements also reflect the same value as the MARC element personal name, subjects, and description values. There are corresponding elements in both of the standards.

            Both standards also share a standardized vocabulary. MARC has delimiters available to specifically address certain circumstances in categories, which are expressed numerically in the MARC field. These numerical values are included in the above discussion, and reflect specific attributes of the field they are entered. Variances in the author category are addressed through delimiters of varying descriptions, and the numerical codes assigned to those delimiters clarify the origin of the value. Dublin Core has a standardized vocabulary in generally accepted values are typically used for each element, although there are not the limitations on expanding the vocabulary as in MARC.

Differences in Standards

Metadata standards for Graceling differ between Dublin Core and MARC by the ability to repeat elements in Dublin Core, and by the ability to have sub-type and sub-object relationships (Nair & Jeevan, 2004, p. 4). While creating the record for Graceling, elements were able to be repeated, this is not available on the MARC record. These supplemental entries enable users to have broader access to database search responses, and enable these responses to be more specific to their particular needs. 

Where MARC has been the traditional standard based on print materials needing to be entered into a machine readable system, Dublin Core responds to developing formats that are unconventional to metadata categorization. Attempts to expand MARC to be a functional standard for developing formats has been unsuccessful due to the system limitations on mapping relationships between elements. Although my resource for the Dublin Core record creations is a print material, referencing this to ebooks, audio resources, electronic files, websites, and other electronic resources is not possible through the MARC record. Dublin Core is able to describe a variety of electronic objects, which is not available through the MARC standard.

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) Principles

            Tillett (2003) summarizes FRBR as the theoretical standard for cataloging resources based on content description, relationships, and attributes for all types of materials. A revised vocabulary is proposed to meet current and future user needs. The key consideration of FRBR is the attention to relationships between resources, and the ability to cross reference between these relationships. Structured and unstructured values are used to link associated entities (Picco & Repiso, 2012, p. 634). FRBR assigns user tasks to find, identify, select, obtain, and explore resources (Tillett, 2003, p. 5) to explore how resources are related to each other and then evaluated by the user. This standard explores the needs of the user through subject searching and the relationships between the subject values (Zavalina, 2012, p. 159).

FRBR Principles in MARC Standard

                        MARC has been the accepted metadata standard for the past forty years. It was developed to encode and exchange bibliographic data in a machine readable structure while allowing for storage and organization of this data in a uniform and standardized system (Lee & Jacob, 2011, p. 17). While this standard is sufficient for traditional print resource, the standard does not address the unique needs of electronic, computer, and internet data. The MARC standard creates records with a fixed format, and does not indicate relationships between linked data (Baker, 2012.).

            While MARC is a fixed format, there are corresponding FRBR attributes that can be linked between the standards. Lee and Jacob (2011) argue that mapping these structurally similar elements and attributes can further be explored to create a link between the standards to integrate current MARC records into developing new standards for metadata. The FRBR categories determined to be structurally similar to MARC standards by Lee and Jacob (2011) include Author, Title, Subject, Description, Identifier, Publication, and Format. Although each category is not an exact match, the mapping of each value can be evaluated for further research to enable current MARC records to be transitioned and integrated into metadata that complies with FRBR principles. This is a marked difference than the view expressed by Jones (2005) where he stated MARC records could not be mapped to the connections and various levels of abstraction included in the FRBR model, and shows the development of the FRBR model to fit into an applied form. Ultimately, characterizing the categories of data held in MARC records is an essential step in developing new rules and metadata systems for developing methods to meet user needs (Mayernik, 2010, p. 49).

FRBR Principles in Dublin Core Standard

            The Dublin Core standard was developed to meet the growing need to create metadata for electronic objects, which was not addressable through the established metadata standard MARC. The objective was to create a standard compliant with search engines that could index records to improve search quality (Baker, 2012, p. 119). This objective easily supports FRBR principles in addressing user needs. Although the Library of Congress (as cited in Baker, 2012, p. 127) has determined FRBR as a theoretical model whose real-world applications are still unknown, FRBR provides a framework for linked data that was unavailable through MARC standards.

            Dublin Core initiatives suggest using controlled vocabularies, which has been able to be integrated into FRBR models (Nelson & Cleary, 2010). Controlled vocabularies support content identification and indexing, while also exploring relationships between content and attributes.

Applying FRBR principles to Dublin Core requires the previously mentioned FRBR user tasks to be applied to all information resources (Zumer, Leng, & Salaba, 2010). These tasks are general and applicable to all information resources. Users identify a resource, select the resource that is most appropriate for their needs, obtain access to the resource, and explore relationships between related resources. While FRBR principles remain a model for metadata, the Dublin Core standard promises to be able to be integrated with FRBR principles to support international standardization. 


The book Graceling is able to be cataloged in its current MARC standard without difficulty due to being a print resource. However, this MARC standard does not explore the relationships and attributes available in other forms of this resource, particularly the electronic forms and variations of this resource. Dublin Core allows for this resource to be referenced into a database that allows for relationships to be available and variations on the resource to be searchable. Access points are available to link MARC and Dublin Core standards, but the points are difficult to directly map from one standard to another. Catalog archives are changing from simple record compilations into interactive databases that are reflective and interconnecting. FRBR principles are shaping new metadata standards. Creating a record of a resource is not as simple as it used to be. Modern metadata requires understanding resources on multiple levels and how resources are related to every other resource in the database.





Baker, T. (2012). Libraries, languages of description, and linked data: A Dublin Core

            perspective. Library Hi Tech, 30(1), 116-133.


Jones, E. (2005, October). The FRBR model as applied to continuing resources. Library

            Resources & Technical Services, 49(4), 227-242.

Lee, S. & Jacob, E. (2011, January). An integrated approach to metadata

            interoperability construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR.

            Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(1), 17-32.

Margaritopoulos, M., Margaritopoulos, T., Mavridis, I., & Manitsaris, A. (2012, April).

            Quantifying and measuring metadata completeness. Journal of the American

            Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(4), 724-737.

Mayernik, M. (2010, January). The distributions of MARC fields in bibliographic records:

            A power law analysis. Library Resources & Technical Services, 54(1), 40-54.

Nair, S. & Jeevan, V. (2004, July). A brief overview of metadata formats. DESIDOC

            Bulletin of Information Technology, 24(4), 3-11.

Nelson, J. & Cleary, A. (2010, December 21). FRBRizing an e-library: Migrating from

            Dublin Core to FRBR and MODS. Code 4 Lib Journal, 12. Retrieved from


Picco, P. & Repiso, V. (2012, May 12). The contribution of FRBR to the identification of

            bibliographic relationships: The new RDA-based ways of representing

            relationships in catalogs. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 50(5-7), 622-640.


Tillett, B. (2003). What is FRBR?  Washington, DC: Library of Congress, Cataloging

            Distribution Service.

Yee, M. (2007). Cataloging compared to descriptive bibliography, abstracting and

            indexing services, and metadata. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 44(3-4),


Zavalina, O. (2012, September 17). Subject access: Conceptual models, functional

            requirements, and empirical data. Journal of Library Metadata, 12(2-3), 140-163.


Zumer, M., Zeng, M., & Salaba, A. (2010) FRBR: A generalized approach to Dublin

            Core application profiles. International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata

            Applications, 0, 21-30. Retrieved from




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s