> From [log in to unmask] Wed Mar 5 09:14 MET 2003
> X-RAL-MFrom: <[log in to unmask]>
> X-RAL-Connect: <mk-smarthost-1.mail.uk.tiscali.com [212.74.114.37]>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 08:12:13 +0000
> From: Aida Slavic <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: AACR2 as encoding scheme
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Roland,
>
> > That is you're asserting a higher reliability of an
> > A-record as opposed to a
> > record, which just says it uses AACR2 ?
> >
> > Let's assume that.
> >
> > Does it put AACR2 in question as an encoding scheme?
>
> The way I see this it does, simply because there are in
> existence encoded schemes based on AACR2 that have their own name,
> id, namespace.
> Explanation: AACR2 is level of content formalization
> (semantic?) which is then encoded using one of MARC formats.
> AACR2 is simple collection of rules that allow for choice.
> Only when choice is encoded/instantiated in MARC it
> becomes fixed and unambigous.
> Hence expression 'encoding scheme' is not really applicable
> to AACR2 but rather to something like LCNAF
> (see e.g. http://authorities.loc.gov/)
Thanks: That is the clarification i wanted.
rs
>
> aida
>
>
|