Bernhard said:
>Another reason why I think that not MARC is any of our troubles but the
>glacial reluctance against using MARC intelligently ...
*Yes*. We have had only one client (in Tokyo) who was not pleased by
not relegating one publisher or the other to 533 or 534 for electronic
reproductions:
260 $aToronto, Ont. :$bCarswell,$c2010$e(Saint-Lazare, Quebec :$fCanadian
Electronic Library,$g2011)
260 $aVictoria, B.C. :$bUniversity of Victoria,$c2010$e(Ann Arbor,
Mich. :$UMI Dissertations,$g2011)
Another outsourcer reports that they did receive objection from the
"cataloging police" as not being according to AACR2.
>This would include abolishment of >ISO2709, without which MARC
>wouldn't lose any of its potential.
*Yes*. We have had only one client (in Hong Kong) even mention the
existence of that standard.
With the exception of Bernhard, the insularity of our discussions
amaze me. Where is the rest of the cataloguing world? The official
cataloguing code in some countries is brief AACR2 translated into
their language. RDA would have to be translated into English, before
it can be translated into other languages, I suspect.
It seems to me we are in danger of fragmenting what was a growing
unity internationally.
__ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
{__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
