13.05.2012 19:49, Karen Coyle:
> After struggling for a long time with my frustration with the
> difficulties of dealing with MARC, FRBR and RDA concepts in the
> context of data management, I have done a blog post that explains
> some of my thinking on the topic:
> The short summary is that RDA is not really suitable for storage and
> use in a relational database system, and therefore is even further
> from being suitable for RDF. I use headings ("access points" in RDA,
> I believe) as my example, but there are numerous other aspects of RDA
> that belie its intention to support "scenario one."
You've done a very concise and elucidating description of the calamity,
and there certainly needs to be discussion about it.
It raises two questions, although you may not be in a position to
answer the second:
1. Would you advocate a restructuring of RDA to the effect that it
conforms with the relational model, or seamlessly lend itself to
implementations under that concept? Or i.o.w., that RDA come with
a relational table database design ready for implementation? (For
otherwise, as practice has shown, different and incompatible designs
2. Is there "credible progress" by now in the efforts to create a
successor to MARC? (After all, LC had made that e condition for
implementation, and they did meanwhile decide for it to take
place in 2013. Or are they taking the good intention for the deed?)
And if yes, what kind of approach will it be? Relational tables?
If your answer to question 1 is YES, wouldn't that amount to favoring
the relational technology over others, potentially or probably more
suitable ones? For there's that NoSQL movement gaining momentum right
now. But even disregarding that, AACR was, I think, always taking pains
to avoid getting involved with the fads and fashions of data
structures, even MARC itself was never mentioned. Now, RDA test data
have been published in nothing but MARC, only marginally embellished,
thereby foregoing the opportunity to unfold much of its potential.
Sticking as it does to a low-level scenario 3.