I don't think I quite have a handle on the world of cataloging as yet. First walking in, armed only with the experience of the (literally) card catalog of my youth and OPAC (recently learned that term... glad to use it) of my local library system, my mind is now swimming in MARC symbols like dollar and pipe signs, and even more esoteric terms like "meta schemas" and "Dublin Core". Thrown into the fire, I'm just wondering how many of these rules and codes should be permanently nesting in my brain right now.
I've been chipping away at my class research paper when time allows (which it rarely seems to). I chose the topic "MARC vs. XML" because I thought it'd be interesting to learn more about internet language (err... "semantics"). Before I can get to the nitty gritty of incorporating 20 as-yet-unvetted sources, I'm first charged with figuring out a way to explain just what, exactly, MARC and XML are.
To make life more interesting, I've also started collecting sources for a group research project, which I have inexplicably found myself the "leader" of. At issue are a few library systems shelving (oooh... my first library pun!) the Dewey Decimal Classification system (the novice librarian is easily spotted by his/her use of "DDS" rather than "DDC", I have come to find out) in place of BISAC (book industry standard) subject headings--basically turning the local library into a Barnes and Noble. How do I feel about this? I'm not quite sure. Yet. The budding professional in me says to sneer. But the layman library-goer in me asks why not? Wasn't it Cutter who stated that the library catalog system should be geared toward the users' convenience?
You'll forgive me if I've quoted Cutter out of context. I have fields, tags, indicators, and subfields on the mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment