The Endeca implementation at the Triangle Research Libraries Network (and
indeed, in general) is an *index* of information about items in our
libraries' collections. The format of the data that's fed into the index
can be (and is) variable: we're about to start loading items from our
digital collections that are MARC-based into our Endeca index, where they
will co-exist with traditional bibliographic information that comes out of
our ILS systems.
Endeca provides a public interface to library holdings: it is not and
could not be an ILS, performing functions like circulation, accounting
control, etc. In this respect it's more akin to Blacklight that to an ILS.
On 3/14/12 9:28 AM, "Michael Hopwood" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Looks to me at a cursory glance that at least one Endeca implementation
>is still drawing on MaRC data:
>...even if not directly using MaRC for search:
>MaRC is simply the widest-used library standard. If you could get hold of
>ONIX (2.1 or 3.0) feeds, you could in theory build an LMS around that
>instead, or any other data format you prefer.
>There is at least a fair amount of interest on interoperating at least
>these 2 major formats:
>http://www.oclc.org/research/news/2010-04-09.htm (ONIX 3.0 version
>From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>Sent: 14 March 2012 13:00
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [CODE4LIB] NON-MARC ILS?
>Is there a full-featured ILS that is not based on MARC records?
>I know we love complexity, but it seems to me that my public library and
>its library network and maybe even every public library could probably do
>without 95% of MARC Fields and encoding, streamline workflows and save $
>if there were a simpler standard.
>Is this what an Endeca-based system is about, or do those rare birds also
>use MARC in the background?
>Forgive me if the question has been hashed and rehashed over the years...
>[log in to unmask]