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.