I have several major concerns about the current draft of the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles.
First, these replace a set of principles that were elegant in their simplicity and conciseness and therefore easy for laymen to grasp, even though the designers of current online catalogs never bothered to read them so we never managed to implement them completely in existing catalogs. The proposed new principles are wordy, prolix, vague, ambiguous, and difficult to understand. As a result, I suspect they will have the effect of making any catalog that attempts to follow them less functional than it is now. Examples of vagueness include the use of the phrase "belonging to" (in 3.1.2), without providing any sort of explanation of what that means, and the use of "authorized access points," juxtaposed with a practice according to which every variant name is an entity (see below), thereby rendering the concept of "authorized" meaningless. Secondly, 4.2 carves into stone the approach to the multiple versions problem that has created so much havoc in existing catalogs. 4.2 is completely contrary to the general objective of "the convenience of the user." Thirdly, the existing principles are also preferable to the proposed new principles because they are not nearly as tied down to existing catalog technology as the proposed new principles are. The new principles make explict reference to concepts such as "authority records" which may not even exist any more in a FRBR-ized catalog designed to exist on the semantic web in which each entity is represented by a URI. Fourth, I deeply regret the loss of the word "efficient," as in "the catalog shall be an efficient instrument..." The worst designed piece of catalog software in the world can claim that eventually a determined and persistent user will be able to "locate all resources belonging to the same work." The thing that differentiates a good catalog from a bad catalog is the degree of efficiency with which this can be carried out. How efficiently can one assemble all of the expressions of the same work, all of the works about that work, and all of the works related to that work, so as to make choices as to the item or items desired? Efficiency is at the heart of "the convenience of the user." Fifth, I find it disturbing that in 2.2 works are not mentioned as entities that require the documenting of controlled forms of name. If this is an intentional omission, it represents a giant step backwards from current practice, and a major betrayal of the promise of FRBR. It also represents a confusing inconsistency with 5.2.1, which refers to "controlled titles of works and expressions," and 6, which does list works as being eligible for representation by authority records. Sixth, I find it inconceivable that we would ever be able to provide controlled forms of name in authority records for manifestations and items (as opposed to the works and expressions contained in them), as is implied by 6. Finally, 6.1.1 is a recipe for the end of cataloging. If every variant name is considered to be a separate and distinct entity, collocation is dead and Google lives. There is no point in wasting space in this document in order to define the concept of "authorized" or "preferred" access point. Google keyword indexing, being much cheaper than cataloging, is sure to prevail. Clearly the "convenience of the user" is not an objective of these principles at all. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martha M. Yee Cataloging Supervisor UCLA Film & Television Archive 1015 N. Cahuenga Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90038-2616 323-462-4921 x27 323-469-9055 (fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Email at work) Campus mail: 302 E. Melnitz 132306 http://myee.bol.ucla.edu (Web page) %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% "You have a dollar. I have a dollar. We swap. Now you have my dollar and I have your dollar. We are not better off. You have an idea. I have an idea. We swap. Now you have two ideas and I have two ideas. Both are richer. When you gave, you have. What I got, you did not lose. Thats cooperation"Jimmy Durante quoted in Schnozzola, by Gene Fowler, 1951, p. 207-208.
