On 31/05/2012 18:27, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
<snip>And I wonder if anybody is even asking the question as to what the ultimate value will be to librarians or the users. It seems to me to be a case of "change for change's sake" and just have the faith that things will work out for the best in the end. Yet, everybody knows that the vast majority of the public wants to navigate the WEMI structures in all kinds of ways. That's what people have wanted from the beginning and what everybody wants to do in Google today, but they cannot. That is why everyone complains about Google so much! Google, Bing, Mendeley, Wolfram, Facebook, Yahoo, all know that people want FRBR and are scared to death of the time when libraries fully implement it.
Aaron Kuperman said:
Actually, I was thinking more of the "powers that be" making a complete training course available online for free,including FRBR, versions for non-catalogers, etc.Excellent idea. Since for the first time rules are a continuing expense (for those who license the Toolkit) as opposed to a one time purchase, this seems the least which could be offered the cataloguing community.
... some of the FRBR-based changes are not intuitive, and will eventually require all users to be reoriented.True. But the full impact will not hit us until there is a replacement for MARC, and we are actually creating WEM records, will it? For some time after April 2013 we will be creating mainly RDA/MARC manifestation records. Not all of us create authority records, but rather depend on the national cataloguing agencies, and PCC libraries for SARs. The real crunch will come when we have to create three records in order to catalogue one item. Remember, a majority of the items in collections are the single manifestation of the single expression of a work; this is certainly the case for the materials SLC catalogues, we do not catalogue much Shakespeare or Bach.
Yes, I am making a joke.