Re: coyle/hillman article from dlib [terminology]

I think we might need to go back to Karen C's points a while back about
deciding terms and which term to use to convey what ideas.

How about, for the purposes of clarity (clarity for everyone, not just
dense people like me), the following:

MARC = transmission standard = *not* data model
AACR = content encoding (with too much semantics hidden in its
punctuation) = cataloging (= data model?)
OPAC = what the patron/customer/user sees (= way too complex / nuanced
in display?)
Catalog = inventory system = "technical services only view"

What other basic terms need clarification? (The discussions here are so
interesting, & yet I feel as if I know almost nothing due to the
potential for different people using the above terms interchangeably at
times)

Feel free to correct my misinterpretations, this is a discussion and a
learning opportunity for me :)

-Aaron
:-)'

PS: "But it's a horrible, unsystematic, irrational, ambiguous all over
the place data model."  You mean like LC?

PPS This is not to start a flame war, but LC has the same issues.  It's
archaic, represents a 150+ year old (westerno-centric, I believe the
term was earlier) world-view, and is "unsystematic, irrational, [and]
ambiguous all over the place".

Now back to the "real" discussion...

-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries On Behalf Of Jonathan
Rochkind
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:56 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] coyle/hillman article from dlib [mods]

>PS: Talking about data elements in terms of MARC codes is a symptom of
using MARC as a data model.
>{snip}
>But it's a horrible, unsystematic, irrational, ambiguous all over the
place data model.
{snip}