Alexander Johannesen wrote:
>
> Well, in its context it makes sense ; after the tower of Babel people
> couldn't talk to *others*, so the library world is cramming itself
> into *one* language while the rest of the world extends into a
> multitude. But yes, I could have made that more obvious. :)
>
Well, speaking one language internally and globally is an asset rather
than a predicament. Communicating in other languages to the outside
world is made easier that way because conversion routines, conceptually,
have to be devised only once and for all. If they want something other
than MARC, they can have it without our internal structures changing
a bit. Those may need enhancement and enrichment, but no radical change.
> Careful, now; there's plenty of old and new systems and formats that
> are comparable to MARCs brevity and internationalization; DIB, SureX,
> SGML, mBBS, and probably hundreds of other formats that have their
> pro's and con's throughout computing history ...
>
Suggest one or two, and we can talk.
>
> The things that need to happen ;
>
> * Vendor products needs more generic models
> * ILS need identity management for the real world
> * ILS needs AARC2 / RDA rules as validation, and tightened for the real world
All right.
> * Libraries and their systems around the world needs to KILL
> presentation in MARC
Who would that help? It's always only an option for those who know what
they want.
> * Libraries need to demand more from their vendors (get guts)
> * Libraries need to work out how their meta data is relevant to the world
All right. Very good.
> * Libraries and vendors need to come up with (or reuse) a format the
> rest of the world wants to learn or is already using
>
Yes. Which ones?
> Some of this has bits done, but there's a LOT that needs to happen.
Agreed. Only not sure killing MARC is among those things.
>
>> OTOH, all systems being capable of exporting MARC, a thoroughly
>> convincing and comprehensive new solution shouldn't have too difficult a
>> time to penetrate the market. Why hasn't it happened yet? I'm not sure
>> inertia is the only answer.
>
> Stupidity? Lack of guts? Fear of change? Lack of guts? Paired with
> little money and poor support from the real world? So many to choose
> from ...
>
All of it, here and there, but first of all: lack of direction, clear
targets, vision. But they (users) only tell us or let us feel what they
*don't* want, not what they need, or not with any precision. There may
be a thousand different needs and wishes, conflicting with each other ...
A new vision might call for a clear dichotomy between legacy and New
World. But right now, there's no such vision. It would have to include
a migration path, probably the most difficult part.
B.Eversberg
Received on Wed Jun 09 2010 - 02:07:34 EDT