Peter Schlumpf wrote:
> ... asking challenging questions that finally get down
> to the meat of what a catalog really is, or could be (I hesitate to use the
> word "should" because that implies there's only one correct way).
>
It is not about finding "one correct way", I think.
There are those functions to consider that libraries, and their catalogs
in particular, have fulfilled to this day. Starting with a blank slate
has its appeal, certainly, but then at least we have to say whether or
not this or that heritage functionality is obsolete or not.
The modernized Cutter "objects", with the austere lettering of "FRBR"
on the spine, are certainly running pitifully short of a
comprehensive description of a catalog's duties, but cannot be
dismissed out of hand, or regarded a mere historic footnote either.
Whether we still call the beast a "catalog" at the end of the day
is immaterial. But where do we get if we are not also trying to
reach consensus about a few things we'd definitely want to see in
a library catalog? Why this forum then?
B.Eversberg
Received on Fri Apr 23 2010 - 10:26:43 EDT