Weinheimer Jim wrote:
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
We might first have to say why library catalogs are still a better
solution to many problems of searching, before we begin advocating
their
improvement via RDA and FRBR.
Another consideration that we should not overlook is that catalogs
Karen wrote: We have to quit thinking that catalog = library, and start
looking at a wider range of services that we can (and do) provide.
Whoa! Stop!
This would imply that 'we' have all been thinking this--as if we all have
tunnel vision. I don't think that is true at all. Obviously the
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Weinheimer Jim
Sent: 10 noiembrie 2008 10:25
To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] libraries, society and RDA
Dear Jim
takes time to
Karen Coyle wrote:
I think we have made a mistake in focusing on the catalog as the main
user tool. Our model for user service should instead be the reference
service. The catalog is inherently about the library's holdings, already
a narrow scope. In reference service, the user comes in with
I think GBS has to be viewed as one component in a broader interactive
information space and not as complete in itself vis-à-vis its metadata
manipulation capabilities, which remain comparatively primitive. Assuming OCLC
is successful in its plans to automatically populating WorldCat with MARC
Miksa, Shawne wrote:
Karen wrote: We have to quit thinking that catalog = library, and start looking at
a wider range of services that we can (and do) provide.
Whoa! Stop!
This would imply that 'we' have all been thinking this--as if we all have tunnel vision.
I don't think that is true at
Of course we have to talk about the larger context, but I don't understand why
we have to stop talking about the catalog. It seems there are two arguments
here, at the very least. How can we make the argument that comparing catalogs
to Google is incorrect and useless (i.e., apples to oranges)
Shawne:
I'm not sure we do ourselves any favors by continuing to use catalog
when we really mean bibliographic data as a whole--these are two
different things, in my opinion, and it's the second that we need to
focus on, rather than continue to fuss over catalogs.
A catalog which is accessible
I like fussing.
This idea of hoarding and hiding is difficult to understand as it makes it
sound as if librarians, and especially those who catalog, are cave dwellers who
can't speak. I would also ask you to not generalize all cataloging courses as
traditional. We've been incorporating
Call for Presenters - ALA Midwinter
ALCTS CCS Cataloging Norms Interest Group
---
ALCTS CCS Cataloging Norms Discussion Group invites speakers for its
meeting at the ALA Midwinter Conference in Denver, Saturday, January 24,
2009, from 1:30 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Presentation topics should be of current
To me the hard part is ensuring consistency, first of terminology, but
more fundamentally of granularity and categorization. The great virtue
of MARC/AACR/LSCH cataloging is that it is as consistent as it is across
many catalogs and institutions and disciplines. That's not a natural
development.
Stephen Hearn said:
To me the hard part is ensuring consistency ...
The natural tendency of thinking communities is to divide
and redivide and to use language, categories ...
Amen. I've just taken over as Archivist for an institution in which
this happened. The institutiona's administrative
The issue is that we hide our catalog records in our catalogs. While the
public face of those catalogs is a WebOPAC, this is only an html based
interface to the catalog data, an interface that is inherently self contained.
The actual records are not searchable via a search originating on the
This E-Mail is intended only for the addressee. Its use is limited to that
intended by the author at the time and it is not to be distributed without the
author's consent. Unless otherwise stated, the State of
Myers, John F. wrote:
(With apologies if I've wandered somewhat from the initial premise or if I've
misrepresented Diane.)
From my point of view, you are spot on as the Brits say.
I think a lot of what flusters people is that there isn't a way today to
lay out a perfectly formed plan with
It seems to me that there's another elephant in the room where we're
talking about making catalog records available to the public, and that's
the fact that most libraries depend on services from which they buy
their metadata, most notably at this point one such as OCLC although
there are a lot of
Colleagues,
By reading your considerations about the relationships between RDA and the
larger context of library operations, and even as related to day-to-day library
practices as your rich examples suggest, perhaps I would write that:
RDA development implies exerting leadership and leadership
17 matches
Mail list logo
