One further question: both MARC and RDI are (I assume) proprietary database
programs and/or data formats. To what extent are the data files readable by
or
exportable to other standard database programs...even the standard .dbf
format,
which is still a standard exhange format although its parent application is
long
since defunct? Is there some reason why such compatibility is specifically
avoided, or is this a case of nobody having been interested in it?
Steven C. Barr
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Seubert" <seubert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: arsclist Cataloging
> At 02:20 PM 12/13/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> >Library vs private.
> >
> >It is my understanding that some fields in the MARC cataloging system are
> >not searchable, which means the desired data is there but not
independently
> >serarchable.
>
> What is searchable in a database of MARC records is entirely dependent on
> what designers of the software choose to make searchable. There is no
> inherently unsearchable data, and keyword indexes often search fields that
> have not been traditionally searchable in library catalogs such as notes
> fields.
>
> >We might begin with what info libraries want and what collectors want. A
> >list of fields (non-MARC) from each group might be a useful start.
> >
> >The argument about cataloging not being discoraphic holds no water with
me-
> >the computer can accomodate it. Why leave important stuff out?
>
> Library cataloging is based around the whole object and on the concept of
> the "main entry", usually the person with primary responsibility or in
some
> cases the title. In a discography there isn't the same concept of main
> entry and as we all know, discographies are often arranged by catalog
> number, matrix or some other information. The data may be the same, but it
> doesn't necessarily translate from one format to the other easily. I think
> reconciling discographic data and MARC data will be the great difficulty
in
> getting a database like the AVRL off the ground.
>
> The main reasons to leave things out are time and money. The more detailed
> the cataloging, the more expensive it is and the larger the backlog
> becomes. Anyway, time to get back to cataloging before our backlog becomes
> any larger than it is...
>
> David
> David Seubert, Curator
> Performing Arts Collection
> Davidson Library Special Collections
> University of California
> Santa Barbara, CA 93106
> (805) 893-5444 Fax (805) 893-5749
> mailto:seubert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.library.ucsb.edu/speccoll/pa/
>
> -
> For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
> http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
> Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
> permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
> from the author of the post.
>
-
For subscription instructions, see the ARSC home page
http://www.arsc-audio.org/arsclist.html
Copyright of individual posting is owned by the author of the posting and
permission to re-transmit or publish a post must be secured
from the author of the post.