Alexander Johannesen wrote:
>
> Yes, it looks serious, it certainly is good stuff that can be reused,
> *provided* the underlying models are good (any good graphs or maps of
> those models anywhere?).
Fine ER diagrams at
http://www.rdatoolkit.org/background
Some more thoughts:
I agree with Jim that the RDA/FRBR approach at the data model is
an exaggeration. It is much too firmly rooted in the 19th century
traditional craft of bibliography.
For the top level, I think the expression level is not necessary,
and the "scenario 1" data model would be overkill. It will never get
off the ground, given that MARC21 practice to this very day doesn't
use identifiers even for persons, series, multiparts in general although
this could have been done long since.
Translations, I think, should not be "expressions" but make their
own works - linked to the original where useful. That leaves just
Date, Content type, Other distinguishing characteristic, and sometimes
Scale as expression elements. Add them, as far as needed, as subelements
to the Work identifier element in the manifestation! That way, they can
still serve every function intended for them.
Then look upon works much like subject headings. And all of a sudden,
you already have countless "work records" in the LC authority file and
you need to do hardly more for them than now. Neatly link them to
corresponding "work records" in other languages, after the fashion
of WorldCat Identities.
For the manifestation level, I think there's an excess of elements. Look
at all those notes! Mostly they should be added as subelements to the
elements they refer to instead of being a separate ePrelement.
The most valuable part of RDA will be the vocabularies. They should put
an end to the horrible inconsistencies we now have in legacy data.
> What efforts are being made to make
> catalogers and librarians understand what is going on here?
>
Without that, indeed, one cannot see where the enormous effort that has
gone into it all will lead to. For in the end, someone's got to do the work.
Presently, it looks like RDA will remain a closed box with no way of
open linking into its content. Leave it that way, and you can forget
about it.
The LC tests will not result in anything close to a full
implementation anyway, and that will be the end of it.
B.Eversberg
Received on Thu Jun 24 2010 - 08:19:04 EDT