So we really do need feedback from Google on how they want us to
normalize oclcnumbers before sending to them, and what, if any OCLCnum
normalization they do on their end, and if they could start.
Good luck getting that feedback though, like I said, when I've tried,
there's nobody left at Google who cares about the GBS API at all, and
certainly nobody who cares about OCLC numbers. Or at least nobody I
could find. Whoever worked on the original implementation is now off to
some other project.
Jonathan
Xiaoming Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_jhu.edu> wrote:
>
>
>> What we actually need is for OCLC to publish a spec on "normalizing" OCLC
>> numbers. Which I guess would actually be as simple as "remove leading
>> zeroes."
>>
>>
>
>
> I cannot speak for OCLC, but xOCLCNUM service includes a "getVariants"
> service which normalizes OCLCNUM somehow, such as:
>
> http://xisbn.worldcat.org/webservices/xid/oclcnum/07913025?method=getVariants
>
> The API document has a link to how OCLCNUM variants are used:
>
> http://xisbn.worldcat.org/xisbnadmin/xoclcnum/api.htm#getvariants
>
> http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/253/253.pdf
>
> It may be clear from the service that when you use naked OCLCNUM, you should
> remove the leaving zeros, but if you use it with a prefix "ocm", it was
> recommended to pad the number to 8 digits, such as "ocm07913025".
>
> The getVariants service was suggested by Tod Matola in OCLC.
>
> xiaoming
>
>
>
>> So I actually think Google is doing an acceptable thing, and you should
>> remove leading zeroes before making a query to it. Although it would be kind
>> of Google to normalize on making a query too. But I wouldn't hold your
>> breath; my impression on this stuff, after trying to talk to Google about it
>> before, is that it's pretty much a Finished Thing that nobody at Google is
>> currently working on and nobody at Google currently cares about.
>>
>> But it would be nice if OCLC published a statement saying "remove leading
>> zeroes from OCLC numbers before comparing two OCLCnumbers to see if they
>> match, or submitting an OCLC number to a foreign system for comparison."
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>> Jimmy Ghaphery wrote:
>>
>>
>>> NGC4LIB,
>>>
>>> We have noticed an issue with using the Google API for older items where
>>> we have leading zeros in the OCLC number.
>>>
>>> For example with the leading zero, no result found:
>>> http://books.google.com/books/feeds/volumes?q=OCLC07913025
>>>
>>> Take out the zero:
>>> http://books.google.com/books/feeds/volumes?q=OCLC7913025
>>>
>>> What is the collective take on this? Does this seem like a reasonable
>>> accommodation that Google should make (ideally at someone's request with
>>> more juice than me, hint OCLC)? Or should I scurry about and make
>>> changes locally?
>>>
>>> -Jimmy
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jimmy Ghaphery
>>> Head, Library Information Systems
>>> VCU Libraries
>>> http://www.library.vcu.edu
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Received on Wed Jul 22 2009 - 15:53:56 EDT