1

Debate Script

Moderator:

“Good evening, from the Front Range Community College in Westminster, CO and welcome to

the first and only 2009 debate between MARC and XML. The American Library Association is

the sponsor of this debate. I’m Lesley Stimpert with Emporia State University’s School of

Library and Information Management.

Today’s discussion will cover a wide range of topics, including a description and definition of

what each candidate represents, their history, their uses, and an evaluation of them as viable

schemas. It will be divided into 4 segments. Each candidate will respond to a direct question, and

towards the end of the debate, we’ll have additional time for a rebuttal. The order has been

determined by a coin toss.

The specific subjects and questions have been selected and chosen by me, and have not been

shared or cleared with anyone on the campaign or at the American Library Association.

The audience here in this room is encouraged to ask questions when they feel fit. Otherwise they

have promised to remain silent. No cheers, no applauses, no outbursts, except for now when we

will welcome the candidates…”

(Moderator stays seated. The rest of the group will stand up and clap their hands. The

candidates shake hands, say it’s nice to meet you and thank the moderator).

Moderator:

“Ladies, welcome. MARC, you have a unique and extensive history and many years of service,

while XML is relatively new to the field, yet is young and promising. Tell us about your

histories and what have been significant aspects of your pasts. As we have determined earlier by

a coin toss, MARC will begin. (Moderator looks at MARC to begin).

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #1 – MARC’s Timeline (note to Rachel: Jenn’s timeline doc found

in Bb)

MARC:

“Thank you, Lesley for hosting this debate. XML it is a pleasure to meet you and be with you.

Unlike XML, I have been around since 1965, which represents 44 years of service and

commitment within the library setting. It was found, in 1965, when a survey was conducted,

that:

1) machine readable records would be helpful to libraries that use them.

2) the information on the new automated records would be the same as on existing Library

of Congress cards, in addition to extra, usable information.

3) The best way to standardize would be to use the Library of Congress design.

2

In 1967, I was integrated into libraries.

In 1968 – 1969 I became adopted as a standard and spread throughout library systems.

The 70’s as we all know, represented an area of peace, love, and the ever important and vital

development of encoding standards.

In 1977 UNIMARC was created to integrate Europe’s systems.

The 80’s, as we also remember, was a time in our history of terrible fashion, big hair, but

something else happened then. I was modified to handle other formats such as sound recordings.

The 90’s represented international relations for myself. Specifically in 1994 discussions began

to align US, Canada and UK MARC formats. In 1997, USMARC and CANMARC were

combined to make MARC21.

Finally, in 2002 XML and I campaigned together and MARCXML was created. We tried

operating together since then, but have confronted some resistance within the library community

and therefore, I believe due to XML’s lack of experience, I need to maintain my position as

single reliable product. Reliable, Trustworthy, MARC.

(MARC looks at XML to hear her speak).

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #2 – XML’s Timeline (note to Rachel: Michelle’s timeline doc

found in Bb)

XML:

I want to thank Dr. Chase for coming all the way from Lawrence, KS to be with us during this

debate. Thank you, MARC. It’s great to be here with you, too. And, I thank the American

Library Association for the privilege to be here with you all.

I may be young, but I come from small town roots, and a long line of hard workers. As many of

you may know, my ancestor is SGML. My roots are grounded in standardized general markup

language. For those of you who may not know SGML, let me give you some background. In

1969, Charles Goldfarb along with Ed Mosher and Ray Lorie invented Generalized Markup

Language (GML). A problem existed when computer programs they were using at IBM and the

Cambridge Scientific Center had a difficult time communicating. In 1971, GML underwent

product development, in 1973 it started to be used more widely and in 1986, SGML becomes an

international standard.

My story picks up at the World Wide Web Consortium (otherwise known as W3C) in 1996. The

XML Working Group was chaired by Jon Bosak of Sun Microsystems with Dan Connolly as the

contact, and worked in a partnership with the XML Special Interest Group to create XML. My

3

design goals have been the same from the start, even from the beginning at the W3C, these

included (among other goals): XML shall be straightforwardly usable over the Internet. XML

shall support a wide variety of application, and XML documents should be easy to create.

I have also been open-minded and updated along with our changing times. In 1998 I added

XML 1.0 recommendations and I also added Document Object Model (DOM ) level 1.

In 1999 to 2002 the following additions have been developed:

XML Namescapes

Resource Description Framework (RDF)

XSLT

XPath.

XHTML 1.0.

XSchema

XLink

XML Base

Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.0.

SML Signature which works towards a Web of trust.

These changes have helped me stay ahead of the times. My opponent has accused me of being

too young to properly run things, but I say innovation is what we need.

Moderator:

“Many people do not really know who you are. They have heard the name MARC Records and

may have even seen you in the library. But, you know, people are unsure. They don’t have a

solid understanding and some people are, quite honestly, even afraid. And then there’s XML,

SGML, HTML. Again, people have heard these acronyms. They sort of know what each letter

signifies, but again, they, too are unsure and even skeptical. The people in this community need

to hear from you solid definitions and descriptions. MARC, please state your position, first.”

(Moderator looks at MARC to begin).

MARC:

My name, MARC, stands for MA chine-Readable Cataloging record. "Machine-readable"

means that one particular type of machine, a computer, can read and interpret the data in the

cataloging record. "Cataloging records" comes in two types…the Bibliographic records and the

Authority records. The bibliographic record, or the information typically shown on a catalog

card, includes: 1) a description of the item, 2) main entry and added entries, 3) subject headings,

and 4) the classification or call number. For example, this slide shows an actual MARC record

and the tags (or the numbers that represent these particular fields).

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #3a – Of actual MARC Bibliographic Record (note to Rachel:

Bib. Record to use is at the end of this script)

4

(Describe the MARC record displayed on the ppt slide using the following tag definitions.

Define “tag” = a content designator).

000 - 099 = Control numbers and codes (LOC, Dewey, ISBN)

100 - 199 = Main entry (Author’s name)

200 - 299 = Titles, editions, imprint (i.e., statement of responsibility, publication information)

300 - 399 = Physical description (i.e., number of pages, does the material contain illustrations,

and dimensions of the material)

*400 - 499 = Series statements (i.e., if the material is part of a series)

500 - 599 = Notes (example of a note = a description or summary of the material’s content).

600 - 699 = Subject added entries (example, “Soccer” and “Soccer Juvenile”)

*700 - 799 = Added entries other than subject or series.

*800 - 899 = Series added entries (other authoritative forms)

*900 - 999 = Locally-defined uses (e.g., local barcode numbers).

* Examples of these are not in the PPT example of a MARC record

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #3b – Patron’s view of the record (note to Rachel: Bib. Record to

use is at the end of this script)

(Refer to new slide)

This represents the patron’s view of my record as it appears on the OPAC.

The Authority record contains the standardized forms of names for people, corporate bodies (for

ex. Businesses, institutions), titles, and subjects. The authority record provides authority control,

which is a standard term for an entity’s name and uses that standard term whenever the name is

needed as an access point into the bibliographic record. As an example, when a user searches for

Samuel Clemens, they will be directed to Mark Twain information. I’ll show more examples of

the authority record later in the debate.

(MARC looks at XML to hear her speak).

XML:

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #4 – Of MARC Record and Dublin Core Record Comparison

(note to Rachel: use the images below)

I am a byproduct of SGML, which is a series of related technologies and languages created for

computer use. My name, XML, is an acronym for “eXtensible Markup Language.” XML is a

markup language that can be used to describe bibliographic records. I can also be thought of as a

“grammar” that “establishes rules” or a structure for containing information. By standardizing

5

how information is encoded, I allow for easy transfer of information from one system or program

to another. For example, the same information can be read on a PC, or on a cell phone.

I perform similarly to MARC, but I have distinct advantages when used for accessing online or

digital content. I work best within a partnership with other technologies.

I incorporate two structures: syntactic and semantic. Each has a set of rules. The syntactic rules

stipulate such things as spelling, grammar, and layout. An example of a syntactic rule is: “XML

documents always have one and only one root element - The structure of an XML document is a

tree structure where there is one trunk and optionally many branches. The single trunk represents

the root element of the XML document”. The semantic rules govern what elements can exist in

an XML file, their relationship to one another, and their meanings. (Refer to bottom image on

the PPT slide).

The top example shows Dublin Core, which is a standard that uses XML:

The example below is a translation of a MARC Record into XML…

100 a Shakespeare, William d 1564-1616 <dc:creator>Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616</>

245 a Hamlet <dc:title>Hamlet</>

260 a New York: b Penguin Books, c 2003 <dc:publisher>Penguin Books</>

<dc:date>2003</>

<mets:structMap type="logical"> <mets:div LABEL="source">"</mets:div> <mets:div LABEL="target">" </mets:div> <mets:div LABEL="crosswalk"> <mets:div DMDID="dmReferenceCrosswalk "LABEL="reference"> <mets:fptr FILEID="fidReferenceCrosswalk /"> </mets:div> <mets:div DMDID= "dmdApplicationCrosswalk" LABEL="application"> <mets:fptr FILEID="fidApplicationCrosswalk"/> </mets:div> </mets:div> </mets:structMap>

6

Moderator:

“The people have a great understanding of what you represent and your background, but, they

need to know who you are. Specifically, what are your uses? They need to know how they can

count on you, where you may be found, and what you can do for the people, if elected.

(Moderator looks at MARC to begin).

MARC:

Basically, I am an automated version of the card catalog. My records are used to read library

catalog information on a computer creating an automated catalog.

Catalogers either create or copy the records from OCLC. I am useful to users and librarians who

want to find out what sources are available, where they are located, and what similar items are

available within the library.

I represent 2 formats for providing information. I already have shown you the bibliographic

record, which contains author, title, call number, etc.. Now, I’ll show you examples of authority

records. The authority record includes 3 parts. 1) Headings, 2) Cross references, and 3) Notes.

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #5 – Of MARC Authority Record examples (note to Rachel: use

the images below)

The following example is an authority record of a name heading, which may be a person,

corporate, meeting, or jurisdiction name.

Name Heading:

100 1# $a Woolf, Virginia, $d 1882-1941

(personal name heading) 110 2# $a Association for Childhood Education International

(corporate name heading) 111 2# $a La Crosse Health and Sports Science Symposium

(meeting name heading) 151 ## $a Mexico

(geographic name heading)

The following example is a cross reference heading, which takes you from an unauthorized

heading and gives you the authorized or cataloged subject headings. These references track the

various headings without needing to make additional authority records.

7

Cross Reference Heading:

Authority record information:

100 1# $a Twain, Mark, $d 1835-1910

[Standardized heading] 400 1# $a Conte, Louis de, $d 1835-1910*

[See from tracing] 500 1# $a Clemens, Samuel Langhorne, $d 1835-1910

[See also from tracing]

* Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc is a work of fiction by Samuel Langhorne Clemens (i.e. Mark Twain). The pseudonymous author's name - Sieur Louis de Conte [initials SLC] derives from Samuel Langhorne Clemens [initials SLC]. (from Medieval Sourcebook)

OPAC display generated from the above record:

Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

see also: Clements, Samuel Langhorne, 1835-1910

Clemens, Samuel Langhorne, 1835-1910

see also: Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

Conte, Louis de, 1835-1910

see: Twain, Mark, 1835-1910

The following shows an example of what notes may be contained within the MARC record.

These are used for providing further information to the librarian or the public about the item they

are viewing.

Notes:

670 ## $a Phone call to National Register of Historic Places

[Note for cataloging use] 680 ## $i Surgery performed on an outpatient basis. May be

hospital-based or performed in an office or

surgicenter.

[Note for public catalog use]

(MARC looks at XML to hear her speak).

XML:

I realize that I am the underdog in this decision, when it comes to a track-record. MARC

has been around for many years, is well known by most librarians, and is used in most libraries.

MARC has a lot of experience…(dramatic pause)…but I have a dream.

8

I dream of a future, with flexible bibliographic records, that can be retrieved using a

simple web search. I dream of patrons being able to retrieve catalog information for items even if

they do not know the correct spelling. I dream of a catalog that can contain images and records

in which the tags can be defined for flexible cataloging.

I make it easy to share resources that are in different formats, and provide a standard for

defining “containers” that store information. I make it possible for the same information to be

received as it should on everything from desk PCs to cell phones.

I am a “powerful and flexible data storage medium” that can provide the same

information for different users and have already made great accomplishments, including

improving Interlibrary Loan processes, enhancing digital collections, and contributing to

specialized applications. I have been a part of several specific projects within the field of library

and information science; let me tell you about some of them.

I am used for the website for Service Tasmania (in Australia) and have made it easy for

users to search government information and services via user friendly and interlinked access

points, through a fast loading and easy to use Web site with simple icons and accurate

descriptions. I have expedited the development of a powerful image Web site for the State

Library that goes well beyond the capacity of traditional MARC-based systems.

At the University of Windsor and the Windsor Public Library, I have been a “key

ingredient” for several projects. I was used to organize database information for ease of storage

and access, I was determined to be “viable without requiring a huge expenditure on the part of

the library. By combining a database with XML tools, libraries can use mainstream and database

technologies to create applications for managing large XML collections.

I am part of a new Interlibrary Loan program at Oregon State University, called ILL

ASAP, which stands for Interlibrary Loan Automated Search and Print which has improved the

wait time for Interlibrary Loan items to be processed and received.

I am also the language of ALADIN – Access to Library And Database Information

Network – Washington Research Library Consortium uses XML to provide access to

subscription databases, digital collections, materials requested via ILL, and library catalogs that

run on a combination of commercial, open source, and locally developed platforms…not only

delivers content to seven academic research libraries, but also performs critical related tasks such

as patron authentication using XML messages transmitted between applications over the Web.

Libraries, Museums and Archives have begun using COVAX – Contemporary Culture

Virtual Archives in XML – which uses XML entirely for communication between its clients and

servers. The COVAX project will provide a demonstrator, software and an overall approach that

will be of enormous interest to institutions involved in making their cultural documentation

resources available to web users in an open manner, and future- proofs these resources.

9

Hopefully these examples will open your mind to a future with me. As you can see, the

possibilities are limitless if I am given the right support. With me as your choice, you can look

forward to: Multiple alternative, cross-linked retrieval options beyond subject access;

development of a web-friendly browse-able subject navigation hierarchy, content sensitive and

synonym augmentation in free-text searching to both metadata and the text on the described

page, and much more!

You are empowered to look to the future, and choose me.

Moderator:

“The people have heard you and now understand more about your positions and uses. They need

more information on your vision, though. Specifically, you will both have a chance, now, to

promote yourselves through an evaluation of yourselves as viable candidates. (Moderator looks

at MARC to begin).

MARC:

I am a fantastic tool to use for cataloging materials in the library despite what critics say. As I

have been used since my development in 1966, catalogers are familiar with my language and are

able to communicate with each other through it. As technology progressed, MARC 21 was

created. This has enabled global connections with the libraries throughout the world. Many

countries have adapted to MARC 21. MARC 21 allows data to be exchanged from one country’s

library to another. This also expands the community of catalogers, forming an international

relationship.

MARC 21 has been criticized and labeled as “out-dated.” Am I really? I am still relevant and

very effective. I am the backbone of cataloging and have improved with the times. In 1993

MARC 21 developed field 856 for internet links to bring up bibliographies in an OPAC. Some

catalogers claim that MARC 21 is not as hierarchical as XML, but MARC 21 is hierarchical! I

am not as complex as XML, making it easier to share and understand data. The problem lies with

the underutilization of this hierarchical machine.

MARC 21 does not need to change dramatically but needs to further adapt to the Internet.

MARC 21 can enhance XML but should not be disbanded. The cataloger must understand the

underutilized capabilities of MARC 21. Further exploration and a fresh look at MARC 21 is

needed in library and information science in order to realize my powerful use. With a well

structured format, I can move forward in the 21st century.

(MARC look at XML for her reply).

XML:

10

I have a promising future within the library setting. I am used within many settings, worldwide,

unlike my candidate who is strictly library specific. Let me just begin by explaining some of the

positive aspects of using XML within the library setting.

Libraries handle structured information. For example, the bibliographic records in the library

catalogs have fields, subfields, and indicators that identify the different parts of the record.

Journals are comprised of volumes, issues, articles. Books have authors, titles, chapter, headings,

paragraphs, etc.

I can encode all of this information to allow computer software to process it into different

formats, and extract parts or apply transformations to produce a display.

I can assist libraries with creating custom reports without needing to use their ILS vendor and its

limitations to supply these reports. This will save the library time and money.

MARC is only one metadata out of many. I am a markup language used in all sorts of

applications. Programmers tell me what metadata schema to use. For example, if your metadata

is Dublin Core, you specify Dublin Core in the XML definitions. The computer then knows to

apply the Dublin Core metadata. It can work the same way for MARC. So once you define a

schema for the MARC format, it is a simple matter to wrap a MARC record in XML for use with

a killer XML application of a catalog that is a one stop shop.

Endeavor’s EnCompass software is designed to be this type of interface to search across and link

the multiple metadata databases. EnCompass, which is based on XML, makes it possible to

search through many different collections no matter what metadata scheme they use. The library

may have a collection of finding aids using Encoded Archival Description (EAD), of digital

images using Dublin Core, and the resources in the online catalog using MARC. The user can

search all three collections of records without ever having to know that they were constructed

with different metadata.

There are many, positive uses for me within the library setting, as discussed previously.

(Insert/say XML slogan here).

(XML look to MARC for a rebuttal).

MARC:

Let’s not forget that 10 of millions of dollars have been invested into the current world wide

aggregation of hundreds of millions of cataloging records. Moving to a new infrastructure would

require upgrades to our existing integrated library systems or migrating to a new system, which

would seriously jeopardize the stability of a structure that already performs just fine. My format

is well understood within the library world and it is the only format that approaches universal

application.

Supplying staff with metadata knowledge and expertise is a challenge. Those of us who have

only known a MARC world may find it difficult to learn how to build and use a diverse

11

bibliographic environment effectively. Financial resources and time are required for library staff

to become as versed in new technology as they are in MARC.

XML:

Library users are increasingly forgoing the use of library catalogs in favor of web search engines

when doing research. I care about the displacement of library resources because I want our users

to be able to find and access valid resources.

We are no longer dealing with just bibliographic records, but want to integrate other resources

(ex. ILL, e-journals, and databases). The users want a one-stop-shop searching system. MARC

cannot provide this alone. In order to maintain relevance with tech-savvy and busy users, the

library must make the choice to upgrade their systems.

MARC is library specific, whereas I am more widely used. Programmers are more widely

available and their skills are transferable among various industries. This makes the project of

proposed upgrades less daunting, thus future proofing the library.

Our choice is to remake our bibliographic infrastructure and achieve new levels of service, or to

maintain the status quo and risk becoming increasingly marginalized.

End of the debate:

We need advice on how to close this debate. Comments/suggestions, please!!!

Moderator (Closing):

“That ends today’s debate. We’d like to thank the folks here at the Front Range Community

College, and the American Library Association for sponsoring this debate. Thank you MARC

and XML. Good-day everybody.”

Notes for debate that we didn’t use:

The debate should not be one of whether to replace MARC with XML, but rather how to

define MARC as one more metadata schema that can be manipulated by XML.

MARCXML = a version of MARC for use with XML and the necessary software to convert

MARC into something usable in an XML-based catalog.

Discussions of incorporating XML into a library’s system have been ongoing since 2000.

The Library of Congress is switching MARC into an XML standard. An intended launch

12

date of the MARCXML product is unknown. “Although a number of vendors clearly see a

future based on XML, it will be some time before their systems can easily accommodate

records from a variety of formats. WorldCat and RLIN are moving in the right direction.

OCLC has remade WordCat from the bottom up, employing XML and an in-house XML

schema dubbed “XWC” that accommodates Dublin Core, MARC, and other formats. This

is just the beginning a rich bibliographic infrastructure that could employ metadata in just

about any XML-encoded form.” (from Building a New Bibliographic Infrastructure article,

2004).

From Hillary’s research:

XML also has several spin-offs: EAD (encoded archival description), MARCXML, MODS

(metadata object description schema), RDF (resource description framework), TEI (text

encoding initiative), and XHTML. These markup languages utilize XML organization but

implement their own tags and/or attributes specific to their particular functions. For

example, EAD is used as a finding aid for archives.

it must work in tandem with other technologies such as an interface program and the

program itself. Since it is oriented towards digital information, it may not at first be as

user-friendly as MARC. XML would best be manipulated with some programming

experience.

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #3a – Of actual MARC Bibliographic Record

01041cam 2200265 a 4500

001 ###89048230

003 DLC

005 19911106082810.9

008 891101s1990 maua j 001 0 eng

010 ## $a ###89048230

020 ## $a 0316107514 :

$c $12.95

020 ## $a 0316107506 (pbk.) :

$c $5.95 ($6.95 Can.)

040 ## $a DLC

$c DLC

$d DLC

050 00 $a GV943.25

$b .B74 1990

082 00 $a 796.334/2

$2 20

100 1# $a Brenner, Richard J.,

$d 1941-

245 10 $a Make the team.

13

$p Soccer :

$b a heads up guide to super soccer! /

$c Richard J. Brenner.

246 30 $a Heads up guide to super soccer

250 ## $a 1st ed.

260 ## $a Boston :

$b Little, Brown,

$c c1990.

300 ## $a 127 p. :

$b ill. ;

$c 19 cm.

500 ## $a "A Sports illustrated for kids

book."

520 ## $a Instructions for improving soccer

skills. Discusses dribbling, heading,

playmaking, defense, conditioning,

mental attitude, how to handle

problems with coaches, parents,

and other players, and the history

of soccer.

50 #0 $a Soccer

$v Juvenile literature.

650 #1 $a Soccer.

POWERPOINT SLIDE: #3b –Patron’s view of the record

TITLE :

Make the team. Soccer : a heads up guide to super soccer!

/ Richard J. Brenner.

ADDED

TITLE : Heads up guide to super soccer

AUTHOR :

Brenner, Richard J., 1941-

PUBLISHED

: 1st ed. Boston : Little, Brown, c1990.

MATERIAL :

127 p. : ill. ; 19 cm.

NOTE :

"A Sports illustrated for kids book."

NOTE :

Instructions for improving soccer skills. Discusses

dribbling, heading, playmaking, defense, conditioning,

mental attitude, how to handle problems with coaches,

parents, and other players, and the history of soccer.

SUBJECT :

Soccer--Juvenile literature.

Soccer.

Copies

Available :

14

Questions for the audience:

1) What is your personal/professional experience using MARC/XML?

2) Based on what you’ve learned in this presentation, which one makes sense to use? Why?

3) What would you say are the biggest drawbacks of either schema, and why?

4) Thinking in terms of the catalog of the future, what are other “products” are available,

which libraries should use?

5) Can MARC and XML be used in tandem?

6) Do you think it would be worth the expense and labor to “future-proof” libraries, or is

this a case of “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”?