Re: [RDA-L] RDA subscription costs&Full draft of RDA delivered

2008-07-18 Thread Kevin M. Randall
At 12:03 PM 7/18/2008, Arakawa, Steven wrote: This is somewhat implied by the snippet from Marjorie Bloss below, but I'd be interested in opinions as to whether this model would work: 1. What if OCLC makes RDA available to its subscribers online, as it does with Bibliographic Formats & Standards

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread Karen Coyle
Bernhard Eversberg wrote: On the other hand, there _remain_ also those cases when someone is actually after a book, a paper, an opus or an opera, and preferably the physical object or a complete file (and not just a page or a part or a snippet). We are used to regard these cases as the predominan

Re: [RDA-L] RDA subscription costs&Full draft of RDA delivered

2008-07-18 Thread Arakawa, Steven
This is somewhat implied by the snippet from Marjorie Bloss below, but I'd be interested in opinions as to whether this model would work: 1. What if OCLC makes RDA available to its subscribers online, as it does with Bibliographic Formats & Standards? 2. OCLC adds an annual surcharge to its sub

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
James Weinheimer wrote: That's an important refinement when considering Cutter's questions and rules. The questions he poses are the questions that people asked only *after* they had aligned "their intention with a bookish mindset and then walk[ed] into a library"--and then very probably after p

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread Armin Stephan
Fifty years ago we experienced because of these reasons the birth of the profession of the documentalist but we dug a ditch between our professions and learned almost nothing from these new paradigms of handling with information. (Others - like Google - did.) And now, when internet has come, we h

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread James Weinheimer
> -Original Message- > From: Bernhard Eversberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 1:02 PM > To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description > and Access; Weinheimer Jim > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG > > James Weinheimer wrote: >

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread Bernhard Eversberg
James Weinheimer wrote: I didn't want a work, expression, manifestation or item. Certainly, I was searching--but searching for what? Extremely vague things based mainly on feelings. There was an identification function but nothing related to FRBR user tasks, and I guess there was a selection par

Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG

2008-07-18 Thread James Weinheimer
Kevin M. Randall wrote: > The FRBR user tasks are: > > to find entities that > correspond to the user's stated search criteria > > to identify an entity > > to select an entity that > is appropriate to the user's needs > > to acquire or obtain > access to the en