[Web4lib] The Ultimate Debate: Do Libraries Innovate?

[Ross Singer]

On 6/27/07, e roel <e.roel at usa.net> wrote:
> Like Bill, I respectfully disagree on the MARC record being archaic.  The MARC
> record actually represents a minor triumph of design.  It is very compact,
> migratable, defines the rules of its database format/organization at its head,
> even at its most granular point. It is simply elegant in ways that much of our
> technology today is not.

Honestly, this says to me you've never worked directly with the MARC
record or tried to integrate it with anything else.

There is no doubt that the MARC format was a marvel 40 years ago.
Blindly clinging it to it today makes no sense.  It is an
interconnected world now and MARC doesn't interconnect very well.

Also, the logic is very flawed in saying "if it's hung around this
long, it must be doing something right!".  Our systems are built
around the preservation and transport of the MARC record; this doesn't
mean that the format is superior, it only means that the
infrastructure in place supports it and nothing else.  The fact that
libraries handed over stewardship of the infrastructure to the vendors
has ensured that the status quo will remain.  It's not in the
financial best interest of the vendors to change and it's not feasible
for the libraries to take on an endeavor that would be incompatible
with all of the services and systems they use daily.

-Ross.