عنوان مقاله [English]
Objective: The present study aims to determine the status of manuscript description in Astan-e Quds Razavi manuscript database and source description and access standard (RDA).
Methodology: This research has been done by library-document method and with a comparative approach. The method is used to extract the cataloging elements of the Astan-e Quds Razavi manuscript cataloging and source description (RDA) standard and the descriptive survey method with a comparative approach and a comparative-descriptive survey method was used to examine the degree of conformity of the elements of the bibliographic records of the Astan-e Quds Razavi manuscript database with the standard manuscripts of the description and access (RDA). For this purpose, the bibliographic records of the manuscript of the Astan-e Quds Razavi Library were selected by stratified sampling and matched to the RDA rules through a checklist. This study, while comparing the mentioned, describes the manuscript status in the Astan-e Quds manuscript database and the RDA standard. The study also shows the status of the manuscript description in the Astan-e Quds manuscript database and the RDA standard. Study population is the elements contained in Chapter (1-7) Standard Description and Access to RDA Source (2014) and the elements used in Manuscript Cataloging of Astan-e Quds Library (Bibliographic and Bibliographic Elements of Astan-e Quds Manuscript Database (Updated in 2014) and also Manuscripts Cataloging Rules by Mohammad Vafadar Moradi.
Findings: It was determined by a systematic review: of the elements identified in the RDA. (Chapters 1 to 7), 33 elements are appropriate to describe the manuscript. Of these, the 29 elements (77.88 percent of the elements contained in RDA) correspond to the elements used in cataloging Astan-e Quds Razavi. And only 12.12 percent of mismatches were observed. On the other hand, 46 elements are used in cataloging the manuscript of Astan-e Quds Razavi. Of these, 63 percent comply with the elements extracted from the RDA standard. As the cataloging of Astan-e Quds manuscripts is divided into bibliography and prescription, of the 34 percent that contain mismatches, 97.30 percent belong to the typology department.
Conclusion: The findings of the study indicate the proximity of the set of elements and cataloging rules of the Astan-e Quds manuscript to the RDA. Moreover, in terms of explaining the specific features of the manuscript and the details, the RDA has performed poorly than the rules of Astan-e Quds Razavi. Considering that some features of the manuscript are examined and used in the cataloging of Astan-e Quds Razavi which is not specified by any particular element or title, therefore, it was not calculated in the frequency and statistics contained in the research.