Re: [RDA-L] Utlility of ISBD/MARC vs. URIs (Was: Systems ...)

2010-02-05 Thread Weinheimer Jim
Bernhard Eversberg wrote: snip J. McRee Elrod wrote: imposes structure where it isn't helpful (e.g., where it was based on obsolete card design). Every word of your post rang true, until I reached that last sentence. Insofar as the old unit card structure is reflected in the choice

Re: [RDA-L] Utlility of ISBD/MARC vs. URIs (Was: Systems ...)

2010-02-05 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
Weinheimer Jim schrieb: ... we can begin to consider exactly what catalogers can provide our patrons that the Googles and the Yahoos cannot. Broadly, it is probably the aspect of bringing together what belongs together: -- works by one author -- versions of a work -- parts of a multipart or

Re: [RDA-L] Utlility of ISBD/MARC vs. URIs (Was: Systems ...)

2010-02-04 Thread J. McRee Elrod
Bernhard Eversberg said: For everyday use, URIs are much too cumbersome. Absolutely true! Try a verbal tag for the difference between MARC 130 and 240 for example. MARC's language neutral number tags were a stroke of genius. imposes structure where it isn't helpful (e.g., where it was based