Jonathan,
I think we are in agreement on this. Certainly, MARC needs to change
substantially from its origins in the 1960s as a way to produce and maintain
catalog cards more efficiently, which then turned into a way for libraries to
share cards more efficiently using tools such as OCLC, RLIN
Weinheimer Jim schrieb:
This is a description of a very interesting meeting over metadata, with
many groups involved.
http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/2010/01/google-exposes-book-metadata-privates.html
Most edifying as well as sobering indeed.
Do we conclude that ONIX should replace MARC?
Does that mean alphabetical index displays of names, titles, subjects
etc. can safely be considered dead?
I, for one, happen to like them. As a user, I always find it frustrating
whenever I can't sort a list according to some transparent logic, be it
alphabetical or chronological or by another
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
snip
Karen Coyle said in that meeting:
... the team tried to figure out when alphabetical sorting was really
required, and the answer turned out to be 'never'.
Does that mean alphabetical index displays of names, titles, subjects
etc. can safely be considered dead? We've
Browsing by title may not be that important today with keyword retrieval since
people should be able to sort in other ways. I believe that is the only place
for non-filing indicators (other than series titles), but I may be wrong?
They were only talking about books at that meeting, weren't
RDA in Europe: making it happen!
EURIG - JSC Seminar on RDA
Copenhagen, Denmark, 8th of August 2010, 09.00-17.00
First notification!
On the 8th of August 2010 the European RDA Interest Group (EURIG) and
the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA (JSC) are planning a
seminar on the new
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
James Wwinheimer said:
I think we are in agreement on this. Certainly, MARC needs to change
substantially from its origins in the 1960s ...
I can think of some changes needed: restore ISBD order, e.g., ISBD
Area 0 as opposed to fields 336-338; clean up the messy order of
numbering in 5XX;
ALA publishing is giving the same presentation we did at ALA midwinter
as a Webinar for anyone interested to see a demo of the RDA Toolkit beta
site. We will give the same presentation twice at different times of
day in hopes of covering as may people as possible.
These are the first of
Well, we recently put a quick search box on the library homepage (i.e. keyword
only, with no other initial other options), and slightly obscured the link to
the main catalogue options for left-anchored searches, and although there was
an increase in keyword searching, left anchored title
Good news! The New England Technical Services Librarians (NETSL) Executive
Board has extended the nomination deadline for its annual NETSL Award for
Excellence in Library Technical Services.
We know you've got someone in mind. They've inspired you by meeting
challenges head on; they're innovative
11 matches
Mail list logo
