Jonathan -- I just posted on the need for catalogers to achieve
rapport with systems folks over on Autocat; there was a wee furor
going over the subject of Roy Tennant's RDA article in LJ. There gets
to be a big "us and them" culture when there's really just one group
-- the data and metadata support crew. It's not about arbitrary
standards or technophilia, it's about sustaining and supporting the
growth of stored store and service delivered.
--
Benjamin Hockenberry
MLS, University at Buffalo
On 3/22/07, Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_jhu.edu> wrote:
> Indeed. I've become a broken record on this subject, but I think a large
> part of the solution to our "NGC" needs to lie on the merging of the
> cataloging and library systems fields. I think many of these articles
> we're talking about were succesful precisely becuase their authors
> (whether individually or in collective) had both these expertises (and
> certainly Soergel, who I have a huge amount of respect for, can hold his
> own in both communities).
>
> Catalogers and techies NEED to work together more---I think it needs to
> become a single discipline in the library world, cataloging/metadata and
> library systems are in fact part of the same thing! That can mean
> individuals with both expertises, but it can also mean people working
> together to form groups with both expertises. On catalogers lists I see
> catalogers disparaging systems people and suggesting that they have no
> right to comment on what are 'cataloging issues', and catalogers need to
> 'take control'. But I think this is in large part a reaction to techies,
> on lists such as this one, disaparaging catalogers and suggesting that
> their lack of 'systems' expertise is what has gotten us in this mess,
> and gives them no right to comment on what are really 'technological
> issues'. Neither of these things are true, and it's very frustrating.
> The system and systems we are dealing with are systems including
> technological elements and metadata elements (and 'cataloging' is
> nothing but metadata since before there was 'metadata'), and the
> solutions need to involve both communities--melded into one new community.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> Eric Lease Morgan wrote:
> > On Mar 22, 2007, at 9:41 AM, Christina Pikas wrote:
> >
> >> Pollitt, A. S., & Ellis, G. P. (1994). HIBROWSE for bibliographic
> >> databases. Journal of Information Science, 20, 413-426.
> >>
> >> A. Steven Pollitt (1998). The key role of classification and
> >> indexing in view-based searching. International Cataloguing and
> >> Bibliographic Control, 27, 37-40. Retrieved from
> >> http://www.ifla.org/IV/ifla63/63polst.pdf
> >
> >
> > What's really cool about these sorts of articles is that they outline
> > processes and algorithms for such features. They are just shy of to-
> > do lists. If libraries where add to their staffs people who can
> > implement these processes and algorithms in software, then those
> > libraries will have less of a need for licensed software. Moreover,
> > those libraries would be in a better place for evaluating solutions
> > as they presented themselves, whether they be licensed or not
> >
> > --
> > Eric Lease Morgan
> > University Libraries of Notre Dame
> >
> > (574) 631-8604
> >
>
> --
> Jonathan Rochkind
> Sr. Programmer/Analyst
> The Sheridan Libraries
> Johns Hopkins University
> 410.516.8886
> rochkind (at) jhu.edu
>
Received on Thu Mar 22 2007 - 08:35:20 EDT