LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  January 2013

BIBFRAME January 2013

Subject:

Re: Input screens

From:

"Goldfarb, Kathie" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 16 Jan 2013 08:20:52 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Whether we do away with MARC or not, there is going to need to be some type of coding to identify various parts of a record. I am still not really sure how, in data entry concept, BIBFRAME does much differently. Maybe more fields.

One field that I think was tried many years ago was a subject heading field that consisted of all, or most, of the words that would have been in our 6xx fields in one field. From the keyword search approach, I am not sure I see any problem with that. Sure easier on the cataloger trying to figure out what order a heading with more than 1 subdivision should be.

kathie

Kathleen Goldfarb
Technical Services Librarian
College of the Mainland
Texas City, TX 77539
409 933 8202

 Please consider whether it is necessary to print this email.


-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 1:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Input screens

Am 16.01.2013 03:31, schrieb Kevin M Randall:
>
> Whoever creates the input forms will of course assign labels that are
> appropriate to the elements and that make sense. There should be
> problems only when someone tries to use a form designed for someone
> who works in a different language.
>

Many, as it appears, want to get rid of the MARC language in favor of something much easier to understand and use.
Obviously, any number of input form schemes can be devised which, endowed with all sorts of latter-day embellishments as we know them from Web forms, are easier to understand and use than a blank MARC input screen. Yet, this will always be true only for a specific community or members of a particular agency or network or customers of a certain vendor.

MARC, for all its quirks and deficiencies, is a language now understood and used by technical services people (almost) the world over. It is the living language of catalogers the world over. (Can you imagine them talking, over phone or Skype or mail, using the terms in their local input forms? Or the RDA element set names, for that matter?)

If BIBFRAME or NISO can come up with something that is better in this regard, they will be applauded. If they just invite others (vendors, open source developers, OCLC etc.) to create new schemes for data inputs, for everyone to pick and choose from, they are laying the foundation stone for a new tower of Babel.

Coming to think of it:
English is a language used and understood the world over. It has quirks and deficiencies in abundance. Should it not be replaced by something vastly better? Who's taking this on?

Simply put, a number says more than a label, and it speaks to readers the world over, though not without some education. (Or are we envisioning phasing out all educated staff from cataloging?)


B.Eversberg

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager