Thank you, as well, Hugh. While I agree that authorities are lacking
for any access point, the usage of 490 0 provides a reasonably good
basis for assuming that the series is being entered in a bib record
under LC's policy change, particularly if the library entering that
series statement is LC or PCC. So the gap is more obvious, yes.
Nothing will fill all gaps but there is an opportunity for more to be
done and to be done using methods that are more consistent with the
recent paradigm of information sharing represented by collaborative
social networking.
I agree that there that the challenges you cite will need to be
addressed for any alternative to the norm to be successful. I think
that the "proof" will be in the success or failure of a working system,
not in trying to hammer out all of the these challenges in advance.
That is just my approach (I see creation of policy committees and new
institutional structures as looming death knells for innovative projects
more often than not). I strongly believe in the value of failure (as a
learning model, as a fulcrum for change in other systems, as a basis for
getting it right, etc.) as much as the value of success.
While you are right that NGC4LIB does not, largely, represent the
community that this would serve, that's ok for now. Autocat does not
either - it is a subset perhaps, nor does any "list". As for social
networking (and L2.0) being death knells in the library
community...we'll see. At Cambridge - well, you probably know better
than any whether use of such a resource would be barred by institutional
attitude or policy. In PCC libraries as a whole, perhaps a majority of
librarians would shun such a service, I frankly don't know. In the
library community as a whole - I suspect it depends on whether there is
a critical mass of quality resources that meets real needs for library
users and library staff. This could be an interesting instance that
would bring issues of institutional barriers to extending capabilities
into sharper focus. Such is the nature of dialectic and progress,
methinks.
I have no idea at this point whether there will be a critical mass of
interest for development beyond the flurry of discussions of last week.
It will depend on whether there will are a few folks with some relevant
skills who step up to the plate. "We" have a very reliable and capable
host site offered (iBiblio) with a testbed of LC authority data, some
ideas, and a lot of sideline interest.
Thank you for your observations, Hugh. They are very relevant and
useful.
Regards,
Allen
Received on Tue May 29 2007 - 09:56:20 EDT