 |
 |
Ross Singer wrote: > Well, there's the project by Alistair Miles that Karen alluded to earlier: > > http://code.google.com/p/code4rda > > The goals of this project are, in my mind, crucial in moving forward, > since it's taking our existing corpus of records and turning them into > RDA/RDF. Not only is it a good proof of concept to show how these new > data models would look and work (esp. how they would work w/r/t to > current applications/workflows), but, more importantly, it shows it > can be done *with our current data* alleviating the need for some > unrealistic retrospective recataloging effort. > > I guess the way I look at it is, there's still time to fix this, at > least technologically. There is a difference between the standard, > the data model and the application. > An interesting experiment would be to attempt to use the cataloger's use cases that Alistair worked from, but instead of using the RDA vocabulary to use bibo+vocab.org/frbr. That would give us something comparative to look at. If bibo+frbr can do all or even a lot of what RDA does, then we can demonstrate a different model and explain why one is better than the other (or at least that more than one model will work). kc -- ----------------------------------- Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet fx.: 510-848-3913 mo.: 510-435-8234 ------------------------------------