B.G. Sloan wrote:
>
> If "you go to the catalog when you've identified a resource and want to find out if you can get it through the library", then why do we maintain such elaborate catalogs?
>
>
That was the nature of the battle between some of the speakers in the
FoBC series. There was Thomas Mann.[1][2] who illustrated a couple of
examples where the catalog is highly successful. In the Chicago meeting
David Bade sang the praises of the catalog, and Sarah Shatford Layne
asked (not quite rhetorically) if it isn't worth it all if something in
the catalog helps a researcher who finds the cure for cancer. Others
questioned the wisdom of putting library funds into detailed cataloging
when it may only be useful in a small percentage of cases.These are two
points of view that may not be reconcilable. For some, the amount of
money spent on cataloging isn't subject to any kind of cost/benefit
analysis -- just as for some that there is no question that libraries
should keep ALL books no matter how infrequently used. The FoBC Working
Group was mainly made up of fairly practical folks who were questioning
the need for cataloging detail. (also see my notes from the talk by
Timothy Burke at the first FoBC meeting [3]. He talks about how and why
he searches, and very little of his need is met by the catalog.)
To me it is obvious that the catalog, in all of its detail, isn't
sustainable, but that if we open ourselves up to interacting with other
resources (bibliographies, reading lists, wiki-type things, user input,
etc.) we can accomplish more for the users with less library effort. If,
instead, we insist on creating our own metadata that doesn't interact
with anyone else, we'll continue to incur great expense, and provide
little value for the majority of users.
It's also important to point out that although we have the 2007 OCLC
report on "Perceptions" we don't have figures from before that time. It
is possible that the library catalog NEVER was the primary source of
discovery, and has long been used solely as what Martha Yee calls a
'finding aid.' One other thing that the FoBC report emphasized was our
lack of hard data to support any of our activities and services. For
centuries, we've been holding our fingers up to the wind as a
decision-making tool for the spending of millions of public (and some
private) dollars. That's getting harder and harder to justify.
kc
[1] The Peloponnesian War...
http://guild2910.org/Pelopponesian%20War%20June%2013%202007.pdf
[2] http://www.guild2910.org/WorkingGrpResponse2008.pdf
[3] http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2007/03/users-and-uses-research-2.html
--
-----------------------------------
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 May 07 2009 - 18:28:51 EDT