Frances Dean McNamara wrote:
>
> I'm not understanding why people think separate bib records are useful
> for this. I can't help thinking that adding these things to
> knowledgebases for link resolvers may provide a better end result for
> users.
>
>
My thoughts exactly. Because the purpose of google books is not to
digitize a particular library's copy, but to digitize a book
(manifestation) for searching. So if Michigan's copy has been digitized,
every library that has that book should be able to tell its users that
there is a digital copy available for searching and possibly for viewing
online. It would also be great to be able to link directly to ToC's
(although in many cases the link to ToC is inaccurate in the Google
book). The least logical thing, in my mind, is putting records for these
into catalogs.
It doesn't look like google is terribly open to facilitating linking
services, but maybe they will be in the future. I also can't tell
exactly what identifiers they are keeping in their metadata -- for
example, it isn't clear to me if they always keep the OCLC number from
the MARC record submitted by the library. Ideally, there would be the
possibility of linking using LCCN, ISBN, OCLC #. Those would be *almost*
one-to-one with a manifestation.
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 Thu Sep 06 2007 - 09:38:20 EDT