> I assert that library "catalogs" need to include content beyond
> books. [1]
>
> More specifically, I assert library "catalogs" need to include
> article-level content. Apparently in the early 20th century some
> library catalogs did contain article-level content, but maintaining
> all of those cards for all of those articles was just not scalable.
> This was an opening for H.W. Wilson, his various indexes, and an
> example of library outsourcing. [2]
Although I agree with your goal and consider it to be absolutely crucial to the future library's mission, I have slightly different ideas about "including article-level content." I think we must acknowledge that our predecessors were correct so long ago when they outsourced article-level work. If we decide to include this kind of massive information into our catalogs, I really don't believe that the effort will be sustainable, that is, if we are to keep quality at acceptable standards. If everyone were somehow following the same mandatory standards, it would be a different story.
I guess I think that the moment I harvest hundreds of thousands of metadata records of varying quality and standards into my own catalog, this means I have completely lost control of it. As a result, since I do not know what records are going in there, a search for e.g. Leo Tolstoy loses all meaning since I do not know what I am retrieving. There is no--or at least highly uncertain--authority control, which strikes at the heart of the very definition of a catalog as opposed to a simple listing of resources.
But in my opinion, if we refocus the task just slightly, it may be more achievable. If we think of it in ways such as "catalogs need to *help provide access* to article-level content," I think the task becomes more manageable. To illustrate this, I have tried my own experiment in my catalog (an open-source Koha catalog) which I have revised to function a little differently.
Within the catalog itself, it searches more-or-less normally, but once you look at a specific record, there is the possibility to "Extend the Search" into other metadata silos, e.g. OAIster, the Internet Archive, WorldCat, etc. by taking the authorized forms and searching them there. Here is an example:
http://www.galileo.aur.it/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?bib=18761
At the bottom of the left-hand side is a menu that opens up according to Names, Titles and Subjects. The user selects, e.g. Roman Libraries ==> SBN and a box appears. If they don't know what SBN is, they can click, and discover that SBN is the Italian form of OCLC. When they click on the heading, it will search that heading automatically in the SBN. Users can select other catalogs, including selected open archives. The same function is there for Titles and Subjects.
If you click at the top under "Search Other Collections" you can put in your own terms, select the databases you want, and search all of them.
(By the way, this interface was considered to be confusing by several students--and I agree with them--and I have revised it in a completely new version, not quite ready, but available on a development server at: http://www.archive.aur.it/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?bib=18761
My users so far seem to prefer the way this version works, but obviously, everything can be improved a lot. For example, XLinks and Web Services may prove very useful. I'm also experimenting with del.icio.us at the moment.)
One advantage--at least I think it is--is that the power and importance of authority control immediately becomes much clearer to the user. For example, a search for Mark Twain retrieves materials in my catalog and they can extend this search into SBN successfully, but extending the search for Leo Tolstoy into SBN retrieves zero. Can it be that Italy has no books by Leo Tolstoy?! Of course not, but they use the Italian form, which would never even occur to a U.S. user: Tolstoj It then becomes clear to everyone that something needs to be done. In essence, there is a vital "piece" missing which merges all authority files which could be used by librarians and the public. But this is a different topic.
Perhaps if people see 1) that Google-type searches have their problems, and 2) how catalogs do not interoperate so well because of differing standards, or lack of them, it is my hope that they may come to demand something better. And then there will be some hope.
James Weinheimer j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu
Director of Library and Information Services
The American University of Rome
Rome, Italy
Received on Thu Aug 23 2007 - 02:45:51 EDT