James Weinheimer wrote:

> But people have been backing away from those
> user tasks for awhile now as it becomes more and more obvious that
> people prefer other methods such as relevance ranking and algorithmic
> connections that work in completely different ways.

This statement proves the point that you do not understand what the FRBR tasks 
are.  The FRBR tasks are not "methods".  They are objectives.  Relevance 
ranking and algorithmic connections are examples of methods which are used to 
accomplish the user tasks.  The statement you made is as nonsensical as saying 
"People don't like to travel from Los Angeles to New York.  They would rather 
take an airplane."

> And as for the relationships, there remains that uncomfortable fact that
> *if* they are to be implemented, then quite literally millions of
> records will have to be updated by cataloging staffs that are decreasing
> in numbers; staffs who are already overworked and in many cases with
> morale not doing all that well.

The OLAC Movie & Video Credit Annotation Experiment which you decried is 
addressing exactly this point.  As they say:  "Eventually, we intend to 
automate most of this conversion. For now, we need help from human volunteers, 
who can train our software to recognize the many ways names and roles have been 
listed in library records for movies."

> I just wish that we could declare victory for FRBR now because modern
> computing has allowed people to do them right now, as I have shown
> often
> enough with using the facets in Worldcat.

What you fail to realize is that the faceting will become better and more 
powerful as the data is refined.

But if you're happy with how things are now, so be it.  It would just be nice 
if we didn't hear constant complaints about us hoping for and working toward a 
better future.

Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
(847) 491-2939

Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!

To unsubscribe from RDA-L send an e-mail to the following address from the 
address you are subscribed under to:
In the body of the message:

Reply via email to