On 05/02/2013 14:32, Aaron Smith wrote:
There are many who would argue that “service” is the primary rationale for RDA, that its design is grounded in increasing the efficacy of metadata management to free us for value-added services only we can provide. But you have deftly pointed out that the dialogue has moved us away from the much more broad values that define our profession; we would do well to take heed.
As I pointed out earlier, it is difficult for those in favor of RDA to maintain it is based on the needs of the public when there has never been any research done on their needs and no product testing of RDA on the public. Nobody knows if the public wants any of it or not.
It is like buying a pig in a poke. (I always loved that saying) It appears that opening up that RDA poke (or bag) and looking inside has been considered impolite or even rude, and has made many angry. I think: “Of course you should open up the bag and see what’s in it!” So far, very little except empty promises–and lots of work.