Original Message:
-----------------
From: Thomale, J j.thomale_at_TTU.EDU
MARC's level of precision
might be necessary for the researcher who actually *is* looking for that
specific type of title, but completely inappropriate for Joe User who is
trying to find the latest Grisham novel. MARC, as a data model, is not
optimal for this, and has no systematic way for recording data of
varying levels of precision for this type of purpose.
***kc: Actually, I think this is a system problem, not a MARC problem. You
know that the 245 is THE title, at least for most books and most users. In
the MELVYL system, for other reasons, we ended up with an index called
"Main title" that contained just the 245. It comes in very handy if you
know it is there and what it means. Other than "main," useful title types
are key titles and abbreviated titles, sometimes given their own indexes.
When we get into the added entries, however, I think that the title types
become a bit more ambiguous. ***
Sure, if you're going to
work with Dublin Core, you really need to look at the documentation and
find out the precise definitions of those data elements.
***kc: and that DC documentation is a just a few pages in length and uses a
fairly general vocabulary. AACR2 is hundreds of pages, and we know that the
MARC format fills a 3-4" binder. Note that the document with two chapters
of RDA (6 and 7) is 120 pages in length. The barriers to using library
standards are enormous.***
kc - in SeaTac airport (No, the wi-fi isn't free)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Received on Thu Jan 18 2007 - 12:28:05 EST