05.08.2011 00:36, Karen Coyle:
John Attig:
Access points are treated rather strangely in RDA. The access
point is not itself an element, but is a construct made up of other
elements, which contains instructions about what and when to
include various elements in an access point.
That
On 04/08/2011 21:33, Karen Coyle wrote:
snip
But the rule is that mostly, you use the publication date of
the first manifestation of the expression. (I can't find the rule
for this right now, since I don't have access to a lot) The only
example I can find right now is King Kong:
Quoting Bernhard Eversberg e...@biblio.tu-bs.de:
One more reason, one might think, to get rid of MARC ASAP.
Not really, though. Firstly, because it is utterly unrealistic,
and second. because MARC is flexible enough to be used in
new software applications that do new tricks with the old
stuff
-- Forwarded message --
From: Gene Fieg gf...@cst.edu
Date: Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Browse and search BNB open data
To: kco...@kcoyle.net
Sometimes that MARC data isn't there because of local policies as well.
As for systems not being able to use
03.08.2011 17:42, McRee Elrod:
How anyone comparing the XML and MARC versions could prefer the XML is
beyond me. We find it simple to crosswalk from MARC to XML for anyone
who wants it, but not back again.
The latter is what we had to do in order to construct our database.
Sure you can't get
Karen Coyle wrote,
... recent Code4Lib journal:
http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/5468
One of the difficulties of deciding what we do and do not want to keep
in MARC, or what we want to move over to the RDA environment, is that we
have no dictionary of everything that MARC covers. For
James Weinheimer, speculating on the effects of moving MARC data to RDF XML,
said at one point
Compare this [loss of subfielding in 6XX fields] to losing the subfields in
the 1xx/7xx, where the consequences would appear to be much fewer.
I'm not expert in XML, but I would surmise that
Karen,
Thanks for sharing the article. It is really fascinating, although
depressing. It is obviously a huge, very difficult and tedious
undertaking, and from your experience, it seems that it will require the
work of many people over many years. When I think about the fixed
fields, I
Quoting James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com:
Karen,
Thanks for sharing the article. It is really fascinating, although
depressing. It is obviously a huge, very difficult and tedious
undertaking, and from your experience, it seems that it will require
the work of many people over
On a different note and more details:
Quoting James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com:
What the date in the 240 is supposed to represent, although it is
highly inconsistent in practice, is to break a conflict with another
uniform title (i.e. 1xx/240 combination). They do this mostly
On 8/4/2011 3:33 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
In general I am having a hard time understanding how we will treat
these kinds of composite headings in any future data carrier. They
seem to be somewhat idiosyncratic, in that what data gets added is up
to the cataloger, depends on the context, and
On 8/4/2011 3:33 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
In general I am having a hard time understanding how we will treat
these kinds of composite headings in any future data carrier. They
seem to be somewhat idiosyncratic, in that what data gets added is up
to the cataloger, depends on the context, and
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of John Attig
Sent: August 4, 2011 4:09 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Browse and search BNB open data
...
Access
Quoting John Attig jx...@psu.edu:
John, thank you so much -- this is very helpful. Wonderful, even.
Access points are treated rather strangely in RDA. The access point
is not itself an element, but is a construct made up of other
elements, which contains instructions about what and when
Brenndorfer, Thomas tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca wrote:
In RDA 8.11, it's an attribute for a Person entity-- it's used when the core
elements for a Person are not sufficient for differentiation. [I'm aware of
the error in RDA that is being corrected-- the placement of this element in
02.08.2011 18:34, J. McRee Elrod:
http://www.allegro-c.de/db/a30/bl.htm
Am I correct that there is no MARC display available?
OK, for what it's worth and for good measure, I've added that in;
no big deal since we've got what it takes.
Now, MARC appears directly underneath the regular
On 03/08/2011 08:34, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
snip
02.08.2011 18:34, J. McRee Elrod:
http://www.allegro-c.de/db/a30/bl.htm
Am I correct that there is no MARC display available?
OK, for what it's worth and for good measure, I've added that in;
no big deal since we've got what it takes.
Am 03.08.2011 10:55, schrieb James Weinheimer:
There are definite advantages with this level of coding but on the
negative side, it is more work, prone to many more errors, and is more
difficult to train new people, especially as there will be the push to
simplify.
I think these questions
@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Browse and search BNB open data
Am 03.08.2011 10:55, schrieb James Weinheimer:
There are definite advantages with this level of coding but on the negative
side, it is more work, prone to many more errors, and is more difficult to
train new people
In article 4e38ebe3.5090...@biblio.tu-bs.de, you wrote:
OK, for what it's worth and for good measure, I've added that in;
no big deal since we've got what it takes.
Bless your sweet heart.
Did you notice the not for commercial purposes in the BL posting? We
are not even going to ask. No matter
Quoting James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com:
While there is an undoubted loss in semantics, with the future
evolution of MARC format, we can ask: do such losses have any
practical consequences? Although I think many subfields (although
not the information) could disappear without
Gernhard Eversberg posted to RDA-L:
http://www.allegro-c.de/db/a30/bl.htm
Thank you. Your skill in making resources available is remarkable.
Am I correct that there is no MARC display available?
I'm copying to Autocat, so that the resource will be more widely known.
__ __ J.
22 matches
Mail list logo
