What was the initial motivation for writing an alternative "standard" library? Is it self-sufficient or does it build new frameworks onto of OCaml's standard library?
Related links:
Core: https://bitbucket.org/yminsky/ocaml-core/wiki/Home Batteries: https://github.com/ocaml-batteries-team/batteries-included
I've been interested in OCaml for a good few years now and have tinkered with it from time to time, but I think its time I gave it serious try.
Second, As no better than someone "just starting out with OCaml" myself, I'd like to redirect you to this page on StackOverflow for a comparison between Batteries and Core:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3889117/what-are-the-pros....
Choosing a library is something one should consider only after he has gained some insight of the language.
Well, like I said, I've tinkered with OCaml in the past and have a reasonable idea what it has to offer. While I still have a lot to learn before I can properly make use of OCaml idioms and such, I would prefer if I didn't have to relearn the library as soon as I get to a level where I can write real programs. From the link I see that Batteries is backwards compatible with the standard library, so perhaps its the better one to start with for a beginner.
Probably the biggest difference between Core and the INRIA (default) standard library is that Core itself is mostly written in OCaml. This has many benefits: code is less verbose, easier to read, it's easier to verify correctness, etc.