Philip Davis asks:


Does the DC community regard metadata supplied by a creator or
publisher in a 'header' as a more important source of information
than the title screen?


No, not really.  DC is pretty agnostic about where the data comes
from, and has no intrinsic requirements for fullness of data or the
use of specific (or any) content standards. Essentially the question
of exposing the source of the information requires either external
documentation (like an application profile, which defines usage
within a particular community or project) or some link within the
syntactical binding to administrative information about the data
(OAI-PMH supports some of this), and a few providers have gone quite
far with it.

MARC data, on the other hand, carries most of its administrative data
within each record, and there's an assumption, perfectly acceptable
within a closed world but problematic in a more open one, that the
data was created using AACR2 (or earlier) rules.

In qualified DC, the use of controlled vocabularies is supported in
much the way MARC does it, by indicating the source of the value
used, but MARC definitely exposes traditional library vocabularies
(like LCSH) using a different technique than other vocabularies.
This is pretty much a historical thing, and when they ran out of
indicators, started using the $2 technique. That was useful, but it
does certainly make use of MARC data by non-library applications a
bit challenging.

This whole question about how much information one needs to know to
interpret the data in a metadata record, and how to supply consuming
applications with that data is something I've spent a lot of time
thinking and writing about over the past few years.  In general I
think we're better off exposing that information directly and
explicitly, rather than indirectly, as we have done in the past in
libraries.

Diane
--
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Diane I. Hillmann
Research Librarian
Cornell University Library
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: (607) 387-9207
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Reply via email to