The proposal to use a link to a directory (or even to a bibliographic
record) instead of storing information on affiliation within a metadata
record is also a good idea, especially if the directory is maintained. On
the other hand, the advantage to storing it in the metadata record is that
affiliation names often have subject content and this would be searchable.
Celine Noel
UNC-Chapel Hill
[log in to unmask]
*************************
On Thu, 22 Apr 1999 [log in to unmask] wrote:
> My experience as a cataloguer was that we could not establish personal
> author names uniquely and correctly without a lot of bibliographic
> research. As a special library with a mission to provide health
> information, we decided that this was not a good use of our time. We
> reduced the amount of effort put into descriptive cataloguing and focused
> on subject analysis. This was back in about 1980.
> AACR is a comprehensive standard for descriptive cataloguing. Together with
> MARC and MARC-based systems, it ensures that searches for known authors or
> known resources can usually be successful. The situation for subject
> cataloguing is a very poor second - this can be demonstrated if you try to
> do a complex subject search on a library catalogue, compared with searching
> on a database like Medline.
> If Dublin Core metadata is concerned with resource discovery, then we must
> not neglect subject areas. This includes working with search engine
> designers.
> And we have to continue to keep in mind: who will create metadata for a
> resource? how much effort will they be prepared to put into it? who will
> pay for the time involved? is this a cost-effective use of the information
> budget?
> Prue
>
> Prue Deacon
> Web Business Solutions
> Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care, Australia
> [log in to unmask]
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|