Philip Davis says:
"Are we trying to provide a sophisticated tool for scholarly research or a crude finding list. Until this matter is resolved, all discussion about the relative merits of different systems is essentially pointless."
Huh. That's kinda like saying "Should I buy a new Ferrari, or that rusted out Ford that's been sitting in my uncle's barn for five years?"...as if they were the only options...as if there was nothing else in between.
As for that "sophisticated tool for scholarly research", if we were solely to limit oursleves to just that I think we'd be missing the boat.
Bernie Sloan
Philip Davis <philipdavis4_at_YAHOO.CO.UK> wrote:
Eric Lease Morgan writes eloquently about the aims and purposes of the list. His object is clearly to temper harshness of debate and promote politeness. I agree with this.
In saying,however, that 'Broadly speaking, our goals are similar,' I believe he points to a basic divide that is apparent on this and other lists. It relates to the fundamental purpose of the catalogue. Are we trying to provide a sophisticated tool for scholarly research or a crude finding list. Until this matter is resolved, all discussion about the relative merits of different systems is essentially pointless.
Philip Davis
philipdavis4_at_yahoo.co.uk
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Answers - Get better answers from someone who knows. Tryit now.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
Received on Fri Sep 07 2007 - 16:56:26 EDT