On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Kevin M Randall <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Yes, certainly, as long as the language of input is MARC, then absolutely
> anyone who does inputting needs to be able to understand that language.  My
> point is that we haven't created everyday-use tools that do the MARC
> translation in the background so people can do cataloging work without
> knowing MARC.  My point is that we're requiring people to learn a language
> that they really shouldn't have to learn.  Programmers should know it;
> managers should know it; but lower level cataloging assistants shouldn't
> have to know it.

Why should even managers have to know the difference between 650 $x and $v
 (answer: they shouldn't because $v is an abomination).

Rarer tags have higher error rates (the rarest are almost always miskeying
; do statistical analysis of tag frequencies and co-occurrences, and you'll
spot all sorts of mistakes (e.g. hitting a key twice, pushing the last
digit of the tag into the first indicator).

For that matter, if the only study every conducted on the, er, subject,
found only about a 50% success rate for *technical services* professionals
 in generating paraphrases of pre-combined subject heading strings, with
reference and general adults scoring worse,  do they have a meaning (and in
what language game)?

If collapsing  two fields changes neither recall not precision when
searching, does it make a sound?

If splitting a field changes recall or precision, which is it not split?

Why must we know the diameter of a cd-rom?

Is this ruler really necessary?