![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ugh homework
Mar. 1st, 2011 06:52 pmMARC 21 is my nemesis.
Ok, so back in the days of yore, libraries used card catalogs. As computers took on more of the responsibility for creating these records, MARC language came into use. It was designed by a computer programmer - not a librarian - and even as records went digital, this outdated language was hauled along.
It's awful. Unlike some computer languages - like my buddy HTML and its offshoots - MARC gives no clues as to what the codes mean. It used arbitrary numbers, letters, and symbols with no pattern. So _ 1 in one field means something completely different than that same thing elsewhere. The rules are complex and convoluted and impossible to read, let alone memorize.
( Here's an example that I'm working on. )
It's like a foreign language. And I hate it.
Why can't the field tags give hints as to the content? Like [author]James C. Fernald[/author]. Or [pub_city]New York[/pub_city]. BECAUSE THAT WOULD MAKE TOO MUCH SENSE.
Ok, so back in the days of yore, libraries used card catalogs. As computers took on more of the responsibility for creating these records, MARC language came into use. It was designed by a computer programmer - not a librarian - and even as records went digital, this outdated language was hauled along.
It's awful. Unlike some computer languages - like my buddy HTML and its offshoots - MARC gives no clues as to what the codes mean. It used arbitrary numbers, letters, and symbols with no pattern. So _ 1 in one field means something completely different than that same thing elsewhere. The rules are complex and convoluted and impossible to read, let alone memorize.
( Here's an example that I'm working on. )
It's like a foreign language. And I hate it.
Why can't the field tags give hints as to the content? Like [author]James C. Fernald[/author]. Or [pub_city]New York[/pub_city]. BECAUSE THAT WOULD MAKE TOO MUCH SENSE.
