 |
 |
On 1/24/2016 1:30 PM, Adam L. Schiff wrote: > > > "The upshot of all of this is: I think it is clear that finding the > events would be too complex to do through automated means (although > automation would certainly help human catalogers to do it). If we > could say, "all conferences are now events" (translating this to MARC: > all 111s are considered to be all the events) and that would be an end > of it, OK, but as I have shown, there is a LOT more than that. This > means that much, if not the vast majority of the work will have to be > done manually." > > > Not even all 111s can be considered to be events. Consider entities > such as these: > > > 111 2_ ǂa Commonwealth Games ǂn (19th : ǂd 2010 : ǂc Delhi, India). ǂe > Organising Committee > > > 111 2_ ǂa Conference for the Reduction and Limitation of Armaments ǂd > (1932-1934 : ǂc Geneva, Switzerland). ǂe Political Commission > > > 111 2_ ǂa Olympic Winter Games ǂn (9th : ǂd 1964 : ǂc Innsbruck, > Austria). ǂe Organizing Committee > > ... Good point. I stand corrected. Even using 111s as events demands judgment on a case-by-case basis and I don't think this can be left solely to computers. Again, is this the best way catalogers should spend their time? If yes, why? If no, why? James Weinheimer [log in to unmask] First Thus http://blog.jweinheimer.net First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus Personal Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/james.weinheimer.35 Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JamesWeinheimer Cooperative Cataloging Rules http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/ Cataloging Matters Podcasts http://blog.jweinheimer.net/cataloging-matters-podcasts The Library Herald http://libnews.jweinheimer.net/ [delay +30 days]