Re: Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)

I think Michael has a very profound thought in his posting. The sooner we 
can stop thinking of librarians and the public (or generically the library 
user), as two separate entities, the better. I believe we would be moving 
into a new way of thinking of library systems in which there is no center 
but a wholeness that we seem to be searchng for in this list. Jai Haravu

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Fitzgerald" <mike_at_JAZZDISCOGRAPHY.COM>
To: <NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)


> At 09:54 PM 3/10/2009, Mary wrote:
>>Throughout the history of the development of automated library systems, 
>>the back room activities were the driving factors in development. We 
>>started with circulation and added back room cataloging.
>
> Oh please - like circulation isn't a public service? Or cataloging? The 
> totality of the library serves the public - acquisitions included (are we 
> acquiring things for staff-only use?). It's a very myopic view that says 
> that only the OPAC matters to the public. Why should this be viewed as a 
> divisive tech services vs. public services situation?
>
> I would love to see a library system that gives more power to the 
> reference librarian so that the public can be better served. Right now, 
> most of the tools are so poor that cataloging data that has already been 
> input cannot be easily retrieved and used in the kinds of sophisticated 
> searches that pinpoint what users need. Too often the reference librarians 
> on the front lines are forced to throw some keywords at a search box and 
> they fare about as well as a civilian would, even when they know in their 
> heads how to do a better search - they are frustrated by the limitations 
> of the current systems (and who has time to do a "create lists" kind of 
> search with the patron at the desk?). Thankfully, we have started to see 
> more MARC data being leveraged in next generation systems, and hopefully 
> that will mean that cataloging will make use of more of the appropriate 
> fields instead of ignoring them "because they don't show up in the OPAC 
> anyway".
>
> It's all connected and as Sharon wrote, it's about good interfaces between 
> the systems.
>
> Mike
>
> www.crj-online.org
> www.jazzdiscography.com
>