On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 7:41 AM, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
snip
I see two big issues here (among many more lesser ones) that should not be
taken too lightly:
1. MARC as input standard has made sure that it was (more or less) the
same everywhere. Someone trained at X could go to work at Y
28.10.2011 11:00, Jim Weinheimer:
Even catalogers don't work with the raw data format of MARC (don't
worry. I won't begin my ISO2709 diatribe again!) but they are
looking at a formatted display.
Right, but the formal arrangement of the tags and elements takes nothing
away from the accuracy
James Weinheimer said in answer to Bernhard Eversberg:
...the display catalogers work with could easily show human-language
explanations instead of numbers ...
Perhaps not easily, given the ambiguity of language. Did you hear of
the cataloguer who entered the person who gave the item to the
I think this is a good idea.
Many terms that now appear in bibliographic records as literals could be
replaced with uri's to facilitate international data exchange. This would also
let users choose whether they want to see a full or abbreviated display of, for
example, p. versus pages,
27.10.2011 19:09, James Weinheimer:
On 27/10/2011 17:42, J. McRee Elrod wrote: snip
Why not enter, for example, [s.n] as a code in 260$b, and have
systems display [publisher not identified], [editeur non
identified], [Verlag nicht identifiziert], [chuban shang
meiyou queding], etc., based on
5 matches
Mail list logo
