In a word ... WOW! All the best in your future endeavours!  Will Bryan be 
assuming your responsibilities?



R.

P.s. -- I enjoyed reading your second paragraph.  --

Robert C.W. Hall, Jr.

Technical Services Associate Librarian

Concord Free Public Library, Concord, MA  01742

978-318-3343 -- FAX: 978-318-3344 -- http://www.concordlibrary.org/

bh...@minlib.net

--

-----Original 
Message-----

From: Mike Tribby <mike.tri...@quality-books.com>

To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA

Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:34:37 -0600

Subject: [RDA-L] I'm taillights




Today is my last 
day in the QBI Cataloging Bunker. As perceptive readers may have inferred 
from my postings here and on Autocat, I'm not exactly the most enthusiastic 
backer of RDA, but before drawing the conclusion that I'm quitting to avoid 
having to implement RDA, please consider that QBI has already begun to 
implement it with no real problems so far. In fact, Bryan and the rest of 
the cataloging staff here will be updating QBI's name authority capabilities 

and authorization to RDA standards in the near future, and converting the 
PCIP program to RDA is under consideration. I'm facing imminent knee 
replacement surgery and at my advance age and crappy physical condition the 
extensive re-hab I'll be undertaking is not a good fit with my 170-mile per 
day round trip commute. Besides, I have a 7-month-old puppy who desperately 
needs to have one of his owners at home everyday so that he doesn't spend 
most of his puppyhood in his kennel.



We still haven't heard from any customers one way or another about 
preferring RDA records, and I only recently discovered that QBI is hardly 
the last vendor in OCLC to accommodate RDA, which surprises me a little, but 

probably shouldn't. I think that for a lot of libraries RDA is a matter of 
overkill, introducing complications into the process of cataloging titles 
that may never have more than one manifestation, expression, etc. That being 

said, and to address James Weinheimer's frequently asked question about a 
business case for RDA, I don't think there is a business case for it for 
smaller libraries other than the perceived need to be in step with the 
national libraries. But for LC (and likely the British Library, LAC, the 
Australian National Library, etc.), it seems to me the business case is that 

it will allow them to focus more on important endeavors like classification 
and subject access rather than the housekeeping aspects of descriptive 
cataloging. For instance, being allowed to accept inputs like ONIX "as 
is" means their professional staffs need not concern themselves with 
converting ALL CAPS fields and similar matters. The national libraries have 
as much right as any other institutions to set their own policies, and I 
don't see how they can go forward in a time of diminishing funding and 
staffing without making major changes. If cataloging is truly a cooperative 
effort, records with nonsensical machine-generated contents notes and all 
caps title fields can be upgraded by other members of the bibliographic 
utilities that house records.



If I were working in an end-user situation (like the persistent dream job of 

a small liberal arts college library located in a picturesque setting), I 
would likely make use of Mac and Michael Gorman's creation and resist RDA 
implementation until faced with a situation where RDA's purported benefits 
would come to the fore. If the MARC replacement and infrastructure that will 

magically make RDA fully realizable come to fruition, that might change my 
outlook, but frankly I don't have much faith in the certainty of that 
happening anytime soon. How long did it take cataloging software vendors to 
start utilizing non-filing characters rather than using stopwords, and when 
will they introduce autofil into most cataloging software packages? Probably 

about the time the paperless society we've been preparing for since the 
1970s arrives.



My last helpful suggestion to the list (which I realize might constitute my 
first helpful suggestion to many list members) is this:

your discussions might be more fruitful if you managed to keep in mind that 
just because other list members disagree with you it doesn't mean they are 
drooling incompetents or arbitrary obstructionists. They might simply 
disagree with you.









Mike Tribby

Senior Cataloger

Quality Books Inc.

The Best of America's Independent Presses



mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com



Wearing the sensible shoes for one more day, then it's back to Spanish 
boots, Roman sandals, and brogans (thanks to Jeff Beck, Merle Haggard, and 
Bo Diddley)

Reply via email to