Print

Print


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]