Response 5, Erin E. McCabe

Reading through the initial part of the FRBR document, I couldn’t help but wonder how much this level of distinction is necessary. Truthfully, I keep coming back to that with a lot of the readings. Adding a metaphor level of linguistic terminology seemed less helpful than it seemed to just add to the muddle.

Stepping away from it momentarily, that kept coming back to pester my thoughts. All this naming of the parts and their distinction seems like unnecessary clarification that could be made more straightforward with a certain assumption of common sense. I think that thing that finally allowed me to let it go and move on, was the state of my office email. Maybe a person has the ability to think of these acts as singular, but parsing it up helps a lot for analysis of your process (which might show room for improvement) as well as helps pinpoint the exact source of a problem-child type of issue. The former case is, I think one of the benefits of FRBR – keeping in mind these components when the catalog world in the digital age is growing through somewhat of an awkward stage.

Advertisements

About Erin E. McCabe

Publisher relations and content development assistant at JSTOR. Master's candidate in Library and Information Science at Pratt Institute.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s