Am 11.02.2013 02:36, schrieb J. McRee Elrod:
> Are we to no longer have alphabetical browse lists, only web style
> searching? I would miss alphabetical browse lists apart from subject
> searches, which I prefer to have in inverse chronological order. That
> too would be more difficult to program based on imprint date in the
> absence of a date fixed field. The imprint date may even be lacking,
> if that CONSER provision is carried over.
BIBframe is, as far as I know, not concerned over alphabetical browse
lists. For this kind of catalog access, or so is my impression, we
would find only very little support in library circles. They'd rather
fall head over heels telling you that that kind of searching would
only confuse patrons and should be kept away from them - as many
catalogs are in fact doing.
Probably, the use of alphabetical listings is an aspect of the
cultural technique of reading that is falling into obsolescence
and is not found necessary or useful to be taught any more.
And in large catalogs, it is in fact far from simple and intuitive,
and particularly so, if you get to title listings. There, maybe
a majority would expect to find a title beginning with "the"
IF BIBFRAME wants to preserve MARC content, then of course there
should be a procision for filing indicators. Better still,
non-sort markers, as we've had them all the time in German data
and as MARC21 also supports them, in theory but not in current practice.