In message <[log in to unmask]> on
Tue, 22 Jan 2002, "Carlisle, Philip" <[log in to unmask]> wrote
>So as you can see 1 database hundreds of problems. I agree with Richard
>that we need to develop a strategy but I think we should be advocating
>the NCA guidelines as a starting point and this would imply imposing
>the need for similar database structures (or am I wrong?)
You don't need a database structure before adopting a standard syntax
for names in a list, though it would be helpful in providing a framework
for links from non-preferred forms of name, links to related persons and
organisations, and so on. It would also be a good idea, if possible, to
distinguish different components of a name to allow them to be selected
and presented in different ways.
Cleaning up a big "legacy" list is certainly a major job, but at least
if you adopt standards you will avoid adding to the problem and can make
sure that any names added, or newly edited, are in the agreed form.
It's a great pity that the library standards and the NCA standards for
name authority files are different - for reasons that appear valid to
each community but which make interworking more complicated. We
certainly don't want to set up any other standards, but we should be
sure that any authority file includes both forms, irrespective of which
is chosen as "preferred".
Leonard
--
Willpower Information (Partners: Dr Leonard D Will, Sheena E Will)
Information Management Consultants Tel: +44 (0)20 8372 0092
27 Calshot Way, Enfield, Middlesex EN2 7BQ, UK. Fax: +44 (0)20 8372 0094
[log in to unmask] [log in to unmask]
---------------- <URL:http://www.willpowerinfo.co.uk/> -----------------
|