On 25 apr 2007, at 03.31, Steven C. Barr(x) wrote:
>

> Well...remember that, to me, "phonorecord" means "78rpm  
> record"...if only
> because the imposing task of trying to list EVERY sound  
> recording...analog
> or digital, regardless of format...that has ever existed is simply too
> overwhelming to even THINK about!
I think the task of compiling every 78 is still a hard to manage  
project. But I am hoping that my project will build on quality  
information with many sources to ensure the highest quality of  
information. Of course user interaction will be essential. I don't  
wish to criticise other sources of information either but I guess it  
is easy to introduce errors when compiling databases from databases  
without stricter controls. Maybe a sort of "Oxford English  
Dictionary" equivalent with good controls, peer review and  
interaction. Of course, some of the information stored might be  
esoteric and only of interest to the purist, and some of the  
information might only be used by someone trying to tidy up their  
collection.

> Now, a discographic database is NOT the same as a catalog (in spite of
> the fact that catalogs could be an important data source for  
> such...!).
> A catalog "describes," using a set of data fields, the subset of
> phonorecords held by a SINGLE collector/institution/wotever. Thus,
> entries like "Condition," "Price Paid," "When acquired" and such
> become applicable (note that these aren't, and CAN'T be in any  
> practical
> sense, part of a discographic database!). As well, a catalog should
> provide on the storage location of a given phonorecord in the  
> collection;
> a discographic database has the option of identifying holders of a  
> given
> phonorecord, but nothing more exact is needed.

My idea is to have this master index and to allow then the individual  
user (maybe paying a small fee to help offset the large costs of  
hosting etc) the ability to maintain their OWN collection database  
and a host of other features. Of course, when the user finds that  
they have a recording not in the master index, they can submit that  
information, etc and hopefully other community members will benefit/ 
can add additional information etc.

But the big question, would anyone use it... help to build in and  
police the data records... and maybe even throw some dollars at it..  
Would there be any grants for this to help provide quality  
information. I just don't want to licence/get data and merge this in  
and introduce many errors and cause problems down the line just to be  
the "largest" database. I think quality counds and expansion can then  
be controlled, manageable etc.

My company is presently paying for the system development (but its  
potential use is not for 78s, but the system is being developed as  
"media agnostic").

Thoughts, brickbats and shouts of "Don't me mad... " welcomed !

Darren