> I agree greatly with Owen. I also think that in reality we are already
> in a world of inconsistency and duplication, but our approach is to see
> that as wrong rather than as something to work with.
Another way of saying this is that there will always be slop in the
system, and we just need to come to terms with that. If you're standing
in the rain, you can't stay totally dry. Fighting this inevitability is
an exercise in futility. Progress is much faster when energy is spent
moving things forward rather than trying to hold back the tide.
> I think many librarians resist the 'ambiguous linking' capability
> because in past experience statements of 'these two are the same thing'
> caused one of them to disappear from view.
FRBRization introduces some interesting problems. On one hand, it's
pretty clear that most patrons prefer the simplicity it brings to the
discovery process.
However, what constitutes 'the same thing' depends on the need at hand.
This means requesting from a FRBRized display is inherently problematic
-- particularly if the patron thinks s/he is requesting something
specific in mind, and doesn't realize that the requesting algorithm
simply chooses the most popular work, the one that's easiest to get, etc.
This process needs to be as intuitive as possible. If our interfaces
require training to use, we haven't done it right.
kyle
Received on Tue Feb 17 2009 - 14:06:41 EST