Actually, MARC is the structural mechanism but the cataloging rules (such as 
AACR2) overlays semantics onto the structure.  I think what we are talking 
about here is really semantic searching.  (This is what we have always 
discovered over the years; semantics are often hidden in structural 
slipcovers).

-markh


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Taylor" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 7:28 AM
Subject: Re: CQL and Marc record fields


>> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 12:05:49 +0000
>> From: Rob Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>>> There's nothing -wrong- with creating a marc format specific
>>>> context set with n thousand possible indexes corresponding to
>>>> field + subfield, and if there is an out-of-band agreement as to
>>>> marc bibliographic profiles (which there obviously are) then it's
>>>> quite possible to use the context set in the community where the
>>>> agreement holds.
>>>
>>> Precisely.
>>
>> So the answer to the original question of does CQL help with
>> searching MARC is: Yes, but you need to think about HOW you want to
>> search your data. Do you want to search by syntax (marc.500a), or by
>> semantics (foo.noteText)?
>
> Agreed.
>
> _/|_ ___________________________________________________________________
> /o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]> 
> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
> )_v__/\  "Truth is absolute, there is no such thing as half of one" --
> Harvey Thompson.
>