Posting to RDA-L
Laurence S. Creider wrote:
I agree that the testing process is being conducted with careful deliberation, and I have much respect for the way the Library of Congress is handling the process. Still, publishing, charging, and testing an incomplete product with a decision on implementation to come after the
testing is finished sounds like rushing to me.
Although I don’t think we can fault RDA for being rushed (many very good people have been spending a lot of valuable time on it for quite a number of years), I don’t think being rushed or not is all that pertinent. It is still all based on the business case for RDA: if an adequate business case can be made (i.e. we will be able to provide x number of services that we cannot currently, or that our productivity will rise y number of times, etc.), then we could perhaps consider rushing into it and pick up the pieces later. But if a convincing business case cannot be made, then it doesn’t matter to me if the implementation date is only after 10 or 20 years–it shouldn’t be implemented if no practical advantages will be gained.