Am 15.11.2011 00:32, schrieb J. McRee Elrod:
I'm told that "Media type is a categorization reflecting the general
type of intermediation device required to view, play, run, etc., the
content of a resource."
But ...
microscopic [not microscope]
projected [not projector]
stereographic [not stereoscope]
etc.
Why the exception for electronic?
Not to mention that many use devices they do not think of as
"computers" to access electronic resources these days.
We wouldn't need to discuss these terms at all if the terms
themselves would not be used in MARC records but the codes.
LC did define codes for the terms but didn't use them in
the test records:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/valuelist/rdamedia.html
In actual applications, like OPAC displays, codes can easily
be replaced by terms, and these may be changed anytime and
anywhere. Only codes are language independent and do not
fall into obsolescence or political incorrectness in which
cases one would have to do millions of textual replacements.
A modern design can and must avoid this sort of flaw.
B.Eversberg
