Well, until the beginning of August, anyone (at least in North
America) can view LC's Subject and Name Authority records on the Web.
( http://lcweb.loc.gov ). When LC brings up its new cataloging
system, access to the authority files will be lost, since that aspect
is not part of the program.
However, I think you'll find that many of the names that you want to
use for metadata will not be in LC's files. Remember, they validate
names as they are used in books, either by or about. Hopefully, the
names used on and within websites will be much more current. If you
use a Names Authority system, you'll want one that can handle
thousands of records a month.
This is straying a bit, but consider a linked system. There would be
a central Name authority file with local links as necessary. Programs
would be written for systems to provide automatic substitutions from
the searched name to the local entry. All of this takes place behind
the scenes. The user doesn't have to know the 'controlled' name, just
the computer system.
Dan Robinson
Indexing Services
H.W. Wilson Company
Bronx, NY
[log in to unmask]
On 23 Jul 99 at 19:37, Mary Larsgaard wrote:
> it seems to me that it's more a matter of money -
> that authority systems (name and subject) are
> expensive to maintain. if metalogers could
> easily log in to LCNAF and LCSAF with
> their best guess on name/subject and get
> LC's naf/saf records back - AND if it weren't
> in naf/saf, send request to LC to add -
> then it works. metaloger doesn't have
> to know about the mysterious innards
> of aacr.
> would the nordic-metadata (MY kind ofpeople:-)
> please give url for their DC template? really
> helpful about referring metaloger to
> authority place.
> mary larsgaard
> university of california, santa barbara
> (yes, at some point i need to figure out
> how eudora signature file works..)
>
> PJ Browning wrote:
>
> > Markus Klink wrote:
> >
> > > Unfortunately there are more cataloging needs in the internet than in a library - that's why we
> > > only have a CORE set of tags to describe resources. What I wanted to express is that CORE tags
> > > without CORE rules are almost useless.
> >
> > I agree, but we must be careful that we create rules that fit the entire
> > community. This community includes librarians, archivists, computer
> > programmers and ordinary people. While many of the homepages out there
> > are junk in terms of what I might need as a librarian, they still
> > deserve the same treatment in terms of metadata.
> >
> > AACR2 is great, if you are a library cataloguer. But Joe Q Public has
> > no idea what it is and probably does want to know. The core list of
> > rules should be another dozen volumes but a one to two page list. Such
> > as list personal names in the form LastName, FirstName (as defined by
> > the native language) or dates should be listed as YYYY/MM/DD etc.
> >
> > I would prefer that some kind of name authority/subject authority
> > control should be used, but it's not going to happen anytime soon. It's
> > simply too complex for the general public. Schemes allow those in the
> > know to use LCSH or DDC or whatever tickles our fancy while the general
> > public can stick with the uncontrolled keywords they are used to using.
> >
> > Paula Browning
> > University of Oklahoma
> > GA--Bizzell Library
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|