Allen,
I'll get into LibraryThing. If that is something that reference
librarians and patrons find helpful, great. Maybe I shouldn't have said
"other library staff."
As for point 2., I don't think copy cataloging has really reduced our
workload as much as some people think. I remember a coworker at my last
job saying, "but that's only copy cataloging you've been doing." I wish
I'd told him that copy cataloging is often harder than original
cataloging. Especially if the original cataloger did a "minimal-level"
record. So I don't see our workload going down that much for the
foreseeable future. And if it did, I would think that would mean we're
not doing a good job anymore.
--Ted G.
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of MULLEN Allen
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 3:28 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] "Third Order"--was Libraries & the Web
Yes, I agree most catalogers have our hands full with the tasks at hand.
Two points though:
1. You included "other library staff" in your remark. Would this mean
that reference staff should not allowed to add tags that they or users
(researchers and others) might bring up to them that are not represented
in a cataloging record?
2. Much (not all, of course) of the work of copy catalogers, including
authority work, is repetitive of work that other copy catalogers are
doing in countless other libraries. If this paradigm shifts, it might
be possible for people with the skills that catalogers bring to
information analysis could be used to help manage and refine cataloging
and other information discovery tools, including social tagging. Would
you be open to catalogers being involved in tagging, not to mention many
other possibilities that are presently not possible because of work
loads such as authority record development and enhancements, cooperative
enhancement of existing bib records so that they are more fully able to
be used in FRBR capable systems, and so on. If we weren't doing so
involved in the present paradigm of doing the same authority work for
the same records in our individual catalogs, there are a lot of
possibilities that exist for cataloging skills.
Allen Mullen
Eugene Public Library
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
>[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Ted P Gemberling
>Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 1:07 PM
>To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
>Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] "Third Order"--was Libraries & the Web
>
>Allen, basically just because we've got enough work handling
>the controlled vocabulary and our other tasks. But I'll look
>at those LibraryThing posts. Maybe that will change my mind somehow.
>
>Of course there is non-controlled vocabulary on cataloging
>records (transcriptional fields), too, and I wasn't implying
>giving that up.
> --Ted G.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
>[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of MULLEN Allen
>Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 2:57 PM
>To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
>Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] "Third Order"--was Libraries & the Web
>
>Ted Gemberling writes:
>
>"non-controlled vocabulary shouldn't, at the very least, be
>something catalogers or other library staff have to deal with
>on a daily basis"
>
>I'm curious about this statement - why not?
>
>Allen Mullen
>Eugene Public Library
>
Received on Wed May 16 2007 - 14:50:19 EDT