 |
 |
Jenn, It's really beautiful. Like a good map or timetable, you can pore over it for hours. I want a big copy for the office. Can you explain it to me a little? For example, what does it mean to say that XML or MPEG-21 has a much stronger connection to the library community—as defined by uptake, intent and appropriateness—than MARC and LCSH? That seems literally backwards. One can perhaps argue "appropriateness" in various ways, but MARC and LCSH are ubiquitous and intended for libraries in a way the others are not. I also suggest changing "scholarly texts" to "texts." There are lots of texts which aren't really "scholarly texts" that libraries—even academic libraries—care about, aren't there? Also, while putting them together has virtues, might there be cause to separate book-texts and article-texts? They certainly differ considerably when it comes to the update and appropriateness of various standards. Tim