On 7.6.2010 17:42, Anna Headley wrote:
> On 6/7/2010 10:23 AM, Ere Maijala wrote:
>> If using subfields is too difficult, it's got a lot to do with the tools
>> we use. Who said, for instance, that you need to enter all the data
>> directly to a MARC record? I used to work on a system that allowed the
>> cataloguer to enter most of the metadata in a form and see the MARC
>> record be constructed by the system simultaneously. You didn't lose any
>> flexibility or the heart of the data, but you could tab through the
>> fields and fill them very quickly. This is just to say that most of our
>> user (staff) interfaces don't do a very good job with the data entry.
>
> hear, hear!!!
>
> What was this system?
>
I just have to continue on the subject a bit. :)
We also made the direct MARC editing as easy as possible. In practice
the editor was a long text field. You'd enter tags, indicators, subfield
codes in form $x and the system would indent it properly, color the
syntax and mark any problems (e.g. invalid tags, indicators or subfield
codes) with a red underline. You could move around, copy and paste (in a
couple of different flavors too) and do all the things without having to
do things line by line, subfield by subfield. So even if you'd rather
enter MARC directly, it doesn't have to be a tedious task with a lot of
mousing around or dozens of keyboard shortcuts. Oh, there would be so
many ways to make things easier... :)
--Ere
--
Ere Maijala (Mr.)
The National Library of Finland
Received on Tue Jun 08 2010 - 08:28:31 EDT