Re: Search/retrieve access is to library data what Gopher was to the web?

I worked as an application support of a library system for some years.
 The keyword search in library catalog is supported by index files
built in side the library database.  When a catalog record is created,
the system will create corresponding entries in the index files.  This
is something like the index entries at the back of each books.  Any
keyword query will base on the entries in the index files and pull out
the bibliographic record to show in the catalog (called OPAC in web
interface).  So it is totally different from keyword search on the
web, which does not reply on any pre-built indexes.

Henry

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 1:46 AM, Wambold, Sally <swambold_at_richmond.edu> wrote:
> Please forgive my ignorance, but how is keyword searching in a library
> catalog different from keyword searching on the web?  Are you saying
> that keyword searching has different varieties?  And how does OCLC World
> Cat on the web fit into all of this?  Doesn't it provide access to
> individual libraries through a web interface?
>
> Sorry.  I need to understand this problem better!
>
> Thanks,
> Sally
>
>
> &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
> Sally Wambold
> Law School Library
> University of Richmond
> swambold_at_richmond.edu
> 804-289-8226
> FAX: 804-287-1845
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
> [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 1:04 PM
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Search/retrieve access is to library data what
> Gopher was to the web?
>
> Allowing a search engine to index the data shouldn't be a legal problem,
>
> I wouldn't think. The problem is that the data isn't available in a
> crawlable way -- it's stuck in databases that only speak Z39.50. Where
> the legal problem comes in is that people feel they can't put their data
>
> out on the open web, right?
>
> I was thinking that one of the barriers is that what we have is this
> highly formalized metadata. The first problem with that is that we have
> it in MARC, which no one other than libraries understands. The second is
>
> that metadata is highly concentrated -- and web search tends to be on
> full text and takes a shotgun approach rather than the precise approach
> of library catalogs. Because the data is concentrated, keyword searching
>
> is often unsatisfactory -- and the web thrives on keyword searching.
>
> If we COULD surface all of the library metadata to the web, then I think
>
> that we'd need to do something other than just treat each record as a
> web page. I think we'd need to create a layer of merged data so that
> each book (manifestation) is represented as few times as possible
> (ideally once, but we know how hard that is), and we'd need a work layer
>
> as well. And we'd need ways to navigate, not just search. Linking books
> that cite each other (like following urls). I guess that's the other
> problem with our metadata -- no interaction between records, few links
> (I'm thinking of the 'related works' fields). So much to do!
>
> kc
>
> Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
>> Sadly, I think much of the barrier is legal/business :  OCLC members
>> are not allowed (or believe they are not allowed) to share their
>> complete records with all and sundry.  Being able to share their
>> complete corpus with all and sundry is what would set the ground for
>> innovation. You never know who is going to provide this, but once you
>> make it possible, somebody will.
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>> Martin Malmsten wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I am simply going to throw down the gauntlet and say that
>>> search/retrieve access to library data is not good enough. For too
>>> long have library data been trapped within data-silos only accessible
>
>>> through obscure protocols. Why is access to library data still an
>>> issue? This was solved in a matter of months on the web, when Excite
>>> (or whichever search engine was first) was introduced. Why are there
>>> not at least ten search engines containing the majority of the worlds
>
>>> bibliographic data?
>>>
>>> Yes, I am stating/asking the obvious.
>>>
>>> So, Linked Data for libraries, anyone?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>   Martin, who really wants a discussion about Linked Data
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -----------------------------------
> 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
> ------------------------------------
>