Jonathan Rochkind posted FRBR Imperfect? So Then? on this blog yesterday. Go read the whole thing right now, but here’s a quote:
[W]e desperately need what FRBR is trying to do—a formal and explicit schematic of how we model the “bibliographic” (or “information resource”) universe. Some agree that we desperately need this, some don’t and think it’s all a bunch of hot air. I’ve made my case for why we need it before, and probably ought to do so again in more polished form.
But those of us who agree that we desperately need this, AND that FRBR is an untested and imperfect attempt to do this—then what? Either we:
- continue to work to improve, analyze, empirically test and validate, and fix FRBR;
- we start over from scratch with something else (which will also need to then be tested by fire etc);
- or we abandon FRBR and do nothing.
I think the last would be disastrous. The second also seems undesirable to me—FRBR is the thing we’ve got, and despite being imperfect and unfinished, a lot of work has gone into it. How do we get closer to our goal by abandoning what we’ve got and starting over from scratch?
To me it seems obvious, that if FRBR is untested, incomplete, and imperfect, the answer is to test it (in many ways), analyze it, start putting it into practice so we can learn what the issues are, and work to resolve them.