Jim Weinheimer said:
"This is a completely different world from 25 years ago when individual libraries had few options except following the big boys."
OCLC seems to have come to this realisation rather late in life. The very first question in the FAQ for the proposed policy is: "Why is OCLC implementing these changes?"
The first part of the answer to this question reads: "The information landscape has undergone vast changes since 1987 when the Guidelines for the Use and Transfer of OCLC-Derived Records were last updated. In response to changing needs and opportunities for sharing WorldCat records, OCLC has updated the Policy to...respond to the changing information landscape."
It's taken OCLC 20+ years to update the guidelines to "respond to the changing information landscape"??
That would be kinda funny if it wasn't so sad at the same time.
Bernie Sloan
Sora Associates
Bloomington, IN
--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Weinheimer Jim <j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu> wrote:
> From: Weinheimer Jim <j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu>
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] OCLC's proposed policy on record use - my two cents worth
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 1:01 PM
> Rob Styles wrote:
> > On 15 Apr 2009, at 15:59, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
> >
> > > It is, IOW, high time that OCLC and LC put their
> cards on the table.
> > > They have a tremendous responsibility for the
> potential of libraries.
> >
> > They have as much responsibility as you choose to
> give them. No more,
> > no less.
>
> Bravo! Excellent!
>
> This is a completely different world from 25 years ago when
> individual libraries had few options except following the
> big boys. It seems as if LC wishes to remove itself from the
> central position it has always occupied. Very powerful
> systems can now be downloaded more or less for free off of
> the web that allow for modularity, true innovation, and
> sharing on not only a national, but on an international
> scale.
>
> Again, it is important for libraries to accept that the
> greatest advances in information science are *not* taking
> place in libraries. Let's face it: the most we have is
> RDA?! It's not enough to just convince librarians of its
> usefulness: there are the people in charge of library
> budgets, and let's not forget everybody else as well,
> like Google and Yahoo, who are the real movers and shakers,
> along with all of the other metadata creators in the world.
> Some of them are doing some really interesting projects. I
> don't think anybody genuinely believes that RDA promises
> anything world-changing at all.
>
> While all of this may be rather humbling in some ways, it
> also allows for many options not possible before. I
> personally am very hopeful in this future environment.
>
> Jim Weinheimer
Received on Sat Apr 18 2009 - 20:46:29 EDT