John Hardy said:
"It seems to me that at the highest level, libraries have the potential
to help users in two ways".
The second of these two ways was: "Sorting the wheat from the chaff
(dodgy information from solid stuff). Libraries are almost the only
entities capable of doing this in neutral way, uncomplicated by
shareholders or voters."
Reminds me of something I read in an essay in the new issue of Prospect
magazine:
"Researchers always need to be reminded not to put too much trust in the
materials that happen to lie within easy reach, but the risk of
distortion will be much greater if they confine their investigations to
a shelf of pre-selected books in a library rather than exposing
themselves to the awe-inspiring quantities of treasure mixed with dross
that Google spreads before them...Google may be creating new problems
for scholars, but it offers new solutions too, and no one can play
around with Book Search for more than a few minutes without stumbling
into intellectual conflict zones that will wake them from the dogmatic
doze that might have overwhelmed them in a well-regulated library."
Bernie Sloan
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of John Hardy
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:59 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] coyle/hillman article from dlib [mods]
Karen wrote in a recent post:
"...What is problematic about the library cataloguing viewpoint is that
it is based on some principles that do not seem to be derived from any
study of user behaviour -- there's absolutely no feedback loop from the
user to the library cataloguing rules. So we have this gap between the
"very good" metadata that libraries have and the fact that users are
flocking to non-library systems. There isn't much glory in being right
if no one comes to use our systems."
Amen. I recently asked two friends doing research at the highest level
in two entirely different fields in two entirely different UK
universities if I could pick their brains unofficially about how they
use the library. Both responses could be summarised as "the library
manages our access to e-journals, but otherwise it's irrelevant. It will
be dead in a few years if it doesn't change". One advised a career
change (advice I intend to ignore).
It seems to me that at the highest level, libraries have the potential
to help users in two ways
* Finding specific leaves in a burgeoning information forest
* Sorting the wheat from the chaff (dodgy information from solid stuff)
Libraries are almost the only entities capable of doing this in neutral
way, uncomplicated by shareholders or voters.
AACR2, MARC and the rest are only useful to the extent that we can
employ them to achieve goals at this kind of level in an efficient and
effective way.
John Hardy
Senior Analyst, Talis Information Ltd
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: 18 January 2007 01:41
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] coyle/hillman article from dlib [mods]
Alexander Johannesen wrote:
> If we are to deal with the
> world we need to talk to the rest of the world. Is Amazon's metadata
> less worth to us because it's not in MARC nor created with our special
> bibliographic rules? If you answer 'yes', well then that's our problem
> right there, and may well be the end of the library world as we know
> it.
>
Actually, catalogers (and I know I'm stereotyping here) don't really
care about the data format, so it's not the MARC-ness or non-MARC-ness
that matters to them. Catalogers care about how decisions are made when
creating metadata, and that the decisions be consistent across items and
between systems. This is not a bad thing, in itself. Unfortunately, they
also think that the library cataloging rules are the only suitable ones
for creating metadata. I'm sure that we can all find fault with Amazon
or Google in their metadata creation, and in that sense the catalogers
are right, some of their metadata is really sloppy. What is problematic
about the library cataloging viewpoint is that it is based on some
principles that do not seem to be derived from any study of user
behavior -- there's absolutely no feedback loop from the user to the
library cataloging rules. So we have this gap between the "very good"
metadata that libraries have and the fact that users are flocking to
non-library systems. There isn't much glory in being right if no one
comes to use our systems.
kc
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
The very latest from Talis
read the latest news at www.talis.com/news
listen to our podcasts www.talis.com/podcasts
see us at these events www.talis.com/events
join the discussion here www.talis.com/forums
join our developer community www.talis.com/tdn
and read our blogs www.talis.com/blogs
Any views or personal opinions expressed within this email may not be
those of Talis Information Ltd. The content of this email message and
any files that may be attached are confidential, and for the usage of
the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, then
please return this message to the sender and delete it. Any use of this
e-mail by an unauthorised recipient is prohibited.
Talis Information Ltd is a member of the Talis Group of companies and is
registered in England No 3638278 with its registered office at Knights
Court, Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, B37 7YB.
Received on Wed Jan 24 2007 - 14:23:59 EST