Forgive this simple country cataloger (well, ok, I presently happen to chair CC:DA as well), but I've looked at the FRBR user tasks. To my perception they are but a further generalization and level of abstraction of Cutter's Objects, adapted to an information universe where there are multiple carriers and access modes to information beyond the book. Cutter's objects served us well as information providers and in my experience as information users. I somehow managed to navigate the research needs of some 18 years of education with the support of an information profession bolstered by 8 simple statements. Further, most of my needs were met by objects 2ii and 2iii -- to show what the library has on a given subject, ... in a given literature. Believe me, I am sufficiently headstrong that if I thought those were "known item" searches, I would seriously have questioned the point of all those years of education. But surely, knowledge that one needs information on a given topic does not constitute a "known item search". So I have to ask, what is so deficient about the 21st century restatement of Cutter's Objects?
John F. Myers, Catalog Librarian Schaffer Library, Union College 807 Union St. Schenectady NY 12308 518-388-6623 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- Bernhard Eversberg wrote: They are, but only for the known-item search and its corollaries. Quoting Kevin M. Randall: > The FRBR user tasks are nothing new at all, and I maintain as always > that they are essentially timeless and universal.
