Re: An article to warm the hearts of cataloguers

So, all we can really do is guess as to what went on.

Maybe Google just didn't understand/care about what metadata might be of 
use in library cataloging. Maybe, but I actually doubt it, for a variety 
of reasons.

More likely, I think either A)  Google took an initial look at using 
cataloging records in their metadata, and when they realized how 
complicated and artificially intelligent their algorithms would have to 
be to actually make any productive use of it resulting in useability up 
to Google's standards, decided it wasn't worth it.   Or, B) OCLC 
wouldn't give them permission for what they wanted.

Or some combination of the above. In both cases though, the library 
community would certainly be the ones responsible.

Jonathan

Bernie Sloan wrote:
> I'm not sure how this article would "warm the hearts of cataloguers" unless being able to say an ex post facto"I told you so"counts as a heartwarming experience.
>  
> Yeah, if catalogers had been in charge, the Google Book Search metadata would be in better shape than they are now. But catalogers weren't in charge. And the librarians who were involved in Google Book Search kinda blew it by not insisting on the use of better metadata.
>  
> This is one of those cases where the library community is sort of responsible for problems that the library community is complaining about. A lot of library groups are up in arms about a project that couldn't have happened without the cooperation of libraries and librarians. Librarians were involved in Google Book Search from day one. 
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>