Quoting "Rinne, Nathan (ESC)" <RinneN_at_DISTRICT279.ORG>:
>
> I firmly believe that Google could never make something approximating a
> dependable, quality catalog without the records that libraries have
> worked so hard to make. Should libraries (and by extension OCLC) look
> forward to the day where they can just give everything away to Google...
> giving into the added powers that Google's alluring algorithms can
> provide? (after all, if they cease to be concerned about protecting
> their records, may that not, in effect, be what they are doing?)
My understanding is that Google receives a record from OCLC for every
book it digitizes. The records do not come directly from the library
catalogs because OCLC is applying something similar to the currently
withdrawn policy on record use. OCLC creates a WorldCat record for the
Google digitized copy (with Google as the holding library). Google is
then provided with *some* bibliographic data, but not the complete
MARC record. I know this latter because when I mentioned to Dan Clancy
of Google Books that their metadata is so lousy, he replied something
to the effect of: that's all OCLC will allow us to have.
Now, Google could use something like Z39.50 and grab a full MARC
record from a library catalog for every book it has. However, Google
has a contract with OCLC relating to the records, and we do not know
the terms of that contract, but I,m guessing that it requires them to
use only the record that OCLC provides. I also assume that it does not
allow them to display the full bibliographic data, because if they did
they would eventually be creating a catalog that would near the size
of OCLC (albeit not in a form that we in libraries would probably
recognize).
I think it is ironic that many libraries will be subscribing to the
post-court agreement Google/AAP settlement, and therefore will be
providing their users with Google Book Search as a library resource.
But that resource will not have library-quality metadata. This will
make any cross searching between library catalogs and Google difficult
(e.g. searching on subjects in both with be totally different), and
will also make it hard for librarians to help users find what they are
looking for in the GBS database.
This is an area where it would make sense for the OCLC members to
insist on having a say in the use of their bibliographic records. If
OCLC is indeed "dumbing down" the records they send to Google they are
directly in conflict with the interests of their member libraries.
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 Fri Jul 10 2009 - 10:13:16 EDT