> Each time I use it, I am impressed with the simplicity of the
> interface combined with ***intuitive*** options that lets you find a
> specific work and then track down a library that owns a copy centered
> on a postal code. We have a multi-search box on our library's homepage
> where one of the options is this new Worldcat interface. It has
> already become part of my arsenal at the reference desk.
Oh, oh--the I-word...
There's a lot to love about Worldcat, and I say that as a consumer. But try
that Lolita search in Worldcat. Yes, finding books locally is a good thing,
and clearly they've been futzing with relevance and display. But in three
pages of results, I see a pile of versions of Lolita, I see two of Reading
Lolita in Tehran, etc... not to mention refining by author gives me the
stumpish choice between Vladimir Vladimirovich Nabokov and Vladimir Nabokov.
(Both gents were quite prolific.)
FRBR would clean up the versions problem, sort of anyway (let's wave our
FRBR wand and just make it happen!), but it wouldn't clean up the apparent
authority control problem. The latter is definitely not OCLC's problem,
right? But then, whose problem is it? Are we agreed this is a problem
requiring resolution? We are casting a bright light on our massive worldwide
unified holdings... and once again the worms are crawling out. (It would be
nice to be able to have a per-item feedback box so at the very least someone
could ask, "Isn't record X just record Y?")
Incidentally, after opting not to enter a zip code for the first couple of
browses, I'm trying to figure out how to do so now. I'm sure it's just
me-the system is intuitive, and I'm broken...
Karen G. Schneider
kgs_at_bluehighways.com
Received on Tue Oct 03 2006 - 08:44:23 EDT