Karen Coyle wrote:
>>
>
> No, but there's also no reason to declare it the ONLY kind of browsing.
I'm not sure I did that, but if it appeared as if, it was unintentional.
> That was my point. The VUFind catalog uses the term browse for another
> type of browsing. Until we (well, our users) get more experience with
> this, we shouldn't reject it because it's not the traditional browse.
Might be useful to define distinct types of browsing. Maybe "phonebook
browsing" would be something everybody still has a mental image of.
(Are you happy with phone directories that have no linear arrangement
but keyword searching of names?)
Result set browsing is a very different category, but also browsing in a
set of headings that happen to have something in common.
>
> And I should also say that the one thing of Mann's that I read, his
> comment to the LC FoBC task force, wasn't very convincing to me. So I'm
> afraid that citing him doesn't give an argument weight. (Although, if
> you provide a link, I'll go and see for myself.)
>
My reference was his latest paper:
http://guild2910.org/Pelopponesian%20War%20June%2013%202007.pdf
(June 13, 2007)
B.Eversberg
Received on Mon Jul 23 2007 - 09:16:37 EDT