Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
> There is as of yet no accepted and widely known standard for
> bibliographic metadata other than MARC. The world at large is
> much more likely to follow Google than libraries when it comes
> to standards. Look at systems that provide and exchange bibliographic
> metadata: the only thing they have in common is that they are all
> completely idiosyncratic. Except the MARC world. And this world can
> very well go on using MARC internally, if only they provide services
> that give users what they want - but currently there is not, as I said,
> the one or predominant standard they would all want (and know how to
> use).
>
This statement ignores the developing RDA element set which is poised to
provide a FRBR-aware, Semantic Web-ready replacement for MARC within the
next year. See: http://metadataregistry.org/schema/show/id/1.html for
the element set and http://metadataregistry.org/schema/show/id/4.html
for RDA roles. (Click on "Properties" to see the list of elements and
sub-elements for each--details on each property and RDF versions are
also available by following links on the page, XML will be available
soon). Bernard in particular might be interested to note that
discussions about adding labels and definitions in German (and other
languages) was discussed at last week's DC-2008 conference.
I agree that we have largely missed the boat, but work is progressing on
this and we need the community to participate and comment. The DCMI/RDA
Task Group page is at: http://dublincore.org/dcmirdataskgroup/ and the
group also maintains a mailing list at:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/dc-rda.html which is open to all.
Diane Hillmann
co-chair, DCMI/RDA TG
Received on Mon Sep 29 2008 - 06:44:14 EDT