Ted P Gemberling wrote:
> But I realize you're making another point:
> that for a lot of users, a list like that might be bewildering in its
> complexity. It seems that's the role of the reference librarian, though,
> to help people work their way through confusing things.
Whereas the reality is that a small portion of users ever ask for help
during a catalog search, and many are searching from home/office where
no reference librarian is available. It's interesting to me that in some
sense the catalog was developed as a way to make up for the fact that
librarians alone were inadequate for the finding of works in a large
library. This from Cutter, 1876, implies that there was a time when the
librarian WAS the catalog:
""It is fortunate for those who have the use of a library if their
number is so small and their character so high that they can be admitted
to the shelves and select their books on actual examination. As that is
often not the case, a catalogue becomes necessary, and, even when it is
the case, if the books are numerous there must be some sort of guide to
insure the quick finding of any particular book. The librarian can
furnish some assistance, but his memory, upon which he can rely for
books in general use, is of no avail for those which are sometimes
wanted very much, although not wanted often."
For our remote users, who cannot examine the shelves at that moment in
time, the catalog needs to substitute for both the librarian and the
shelf browse.
>
> There was another point I thought I should get into related to
> Bernhard's posts. It seems there is a sort of "information imperialism"
> in expecting the whole world to do things the way LC does them. And
> sometimes I wonder if libraries around the world adopt LC practices, not
> because they're better, but simply because of the magnitude of LC, its
> systems and collections, and worldwide influence.
>
Actually, the adoption of LC's practices is not terribly wide-spread, at
least not that I've seen. Where libraries do decide to follow the US
model it is at least in part because the library systems that they wish
to purchase have been developed for the US market and use US standards.
As is so often the case, our imperialism is economic, with some aspects
of the culture following the money.
kc
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
Received on Fri Jun 08 2007 - 16:26:14 EDT