Re: Slightly OT: MARC

Hi María Jesús,

I'll look your links, thank you.

[MODS easy to parse]
> I can´t say you that. I´m not a computer guy :-) (easier to parse =
> easier to read by a computer or program? or not so easy?)

Yes, I meant "easy to read by a computer" :)
I just wondered why you suggested MODS, that's all. I think I
understood it.


[...]
>          Their talk concludes:
>       ?XTM is inappropriate to represent MARC format due to its 
> idiosyncratic structure and dependency between data elements.

Yes, but that's the wrong conclusion. I already mentioned it in [1].
They didn't try to use Topic Maps, they tried to use XTM and that
failed. No surprise here. If they'd use Topic Maps and not a Topic
Maps syntax, the result would have been much better.

[1]
<http://www.infoloom.com/pipermail/topicmapmail/2010q3/008228.html>

Best regards,
Lars
-- 
Semagia 
<http://www.semagia.com>

<http://www.topicmaps.de/mailinglist/> German Topic Maps mailing list
<http://tinytim.sourceforge.net/> Open Source Topic Maps engine
<http://mappa.semagia.com/> Mappa - Python Topic Maps engine