 |
 |
Robin Wendler writes, > ... I believe that 1:1 falls clearly and precisely into the realm of > cataloging rules, which, as David rightly points out, are unlikely to be > followed in DC ... > DC should stay out of the cataloging rules business as much as possible, > in my opinion. Is it then not necessary to more clearly point out the limitations this imposes on attainable results of DC projects? Esp. what it means for interoperability. And what can people expect from the presence of DC metadata and what not, and questions like that. My feeling is that people tend to have unrealistic expectations, esp. if they lack cataloging background. True, cataloging rules ARE not always being followed even in library networks. The larger an operation gets, the more acute grows the need for strict and detailed rules - but the more difficult becomes their enforcement. > 1:1 ... should be dropped from the DC > discussions and carried forward, if at all, in cataloging rules > discussions independent of DC. > We are doing that now in a joint American-German project of translating the AACR into German. It was found that AACR focuses more on the whole of a "work" (whatever the definition) whereas German rules focus on its parts. Interoperability is bound to suffer. Those of you who read German may want to look at a list of top 50 terms and definitions: http://www.biblio.tu-bs.de/allegro/formate/aacr-it.htm Regards, B.E. Bernhard Eversberg Universitaetsbibliothek, Postf. 3329, D-38023 Braunschweig, Germany Tel. +49 531 391-5026 , -5011 , FAX -5836 e-mail [log in to unmask] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%