Am 08.10.2012 09:38, schrieb Keith Trickey: > > The cataloguer's arrogance is part of the "main entry" concept. The > searcher approaches with catalogue with whatever information they > have - could be author or title or words from title etc. For the > searcher the information they use to access the item identifies their > "main entry" which may be at variance with what erudite cataloguers > with a head full of RDA thinks! >
OK, it is arrogance if we try to organize stuff in a meaningful way, and arrogance is a grievous fault. Thus speaks a current school of thinking, and honorable persons are they all who say it, nothing less, and so, they say, what better can we do than bury all those antiquated rules? Let us be humble then and use the searcher's information and not the predilections of our own as points of entry, and let's go forth and change all rules accordingly. And then who were we here, to even think we had to alter names and titles and their spellings, so as to fit our awkward mental model of the catalog? Exactly as the searchers speak, so speak the catalog, all else is arrogance, and that's what mighty Google thinks as well as that new school, and they are honorable persons all, or not? Imposing order where the user does perceive it not, nor value it, is pure ambition, and ask our patrons that they think, is arrogance, which not befits a library for sure! Nor judgement, as we used to deal it out by iron rules, is our part to exercise, for judgement is ambitious, and cannot be the cure. Let not our heart be in the coffin there with RDA, and let all searchers find resources, searching as they may. B.Eversberg
