On rules, Stu W. writes,
>
> The challenge is finding a rule set that is simple enough to satisfy a large
> proportion of users and specific enough to be useful, and that is readily
> understandable. Its a compromise.
>
> [...] Interoperability will not be perfect (surprise surprise).
>
The latter follows directly from the former, imperfection is a built-in
feature of compromises.
And on CORC:
> Its too marcish for my liking, but that also has a certain benefit.
>
Yes, it is rather a good compromise, considering how many people there are
who understand and use MARC, and with millions of marcish data all over.
MARC is, however, only a container. What matters is what's in it, and
that's AACR data more often than not, and there is hardly a more voluminous
book of rules. Certainly not to everybody's liking, but it has ensured
a pretty good level of interoperability, though still not perfect.
> Can we agree we're still learning what the best thing to do is?
>
Even we in the library cataloging trade, after 30 years of metadata
production, are still learning. Welcome everybody who comes up with a
better way of doing things. Only just demonstrate it's better. A few
million records will do ...
Bernhard Eversberg
Universitaetsbibliothek, Postf. 3329,
D-38023 Braunschweig, Germany
Tel. +49 531 391-5026 , -5011 , FAX -5836
e-mail [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|