I heard one Google representative at an ALA meeting say something to the
effect that the libraries weren't that interested in that linking. I
suspect eventually they might make it happen. Why not, from their point
of view as it would just drive more use and even might drive some sales
from their publisher partners? They probably have been working with the
libraries providing books for scanning and with OCLC. And it may not
have been that important to those entities. I think it is fine to link
through Worldcat Google Book to Worldcat to Library. But there's
also some use going in the other direction, library catalog to Google
Book and other online versions. I keep asking at meetings and I think
eventually they might consider it a good idea if they think libraries
are really interested.
Frances McNamara
University of Chicago
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:17 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Cutter's Rules in full text - a case for
FRBRization
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 - 10:15:39 EDT