On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:50:41AM -0800, Karen Coyle wrote:
> I am less optimistic about MODS than Kyle. Having watched it be made, I  
> think it's more than just a bit of a kludge, and carries forward a lot  
> of the problems of MARC21. I also don't think that it has a strong model  
> or philosophy behind it. I think we can do much, much better. What is  
> stopping us is what comes up here: you can create a better record, but  
> that doesn't mean that library systems will use it. Even so, I'm up for  
> trying to create that better record, and I'm even up for creating one  
> that is compatible with library cataloging practices, at least in their  
> intent. Some of us talked about this on the exhibits floor of ALA just  
> in the last few days.
>
> I will start by re-organizing a document I did a few years ago but that  
> was never publicly released. I'll do a new, public version and post it,  
> then wiki it so we can have the discussion. Also, I think that the  
> cataloger scenarios in the DC/RDA wiki are beginning to show what one  
> can do with the FRBR assumption behind the record.

This sounds like a great idea, Karen, and I'm looking forward to seeing         
the document and discussing it.  If a record format can demonstrate a           
significant leap forward then it will be adopted.                               

Keep this list in the loop about the public version.

Gabriel