Quoting "B.G. Sloan" <bgsloan2_at_YAHOO.COM>:
>
> OK. So who convinces Google to add these metadata elements to GBS?
> Do we even know what OCLC metadata Google *plans* to use (or is
> already using)?
One of the great problems that we face in our interaction with Google
(and, to be sure, with other for-profits) is the lack of information
about their product. Until the exposure of the settlement document,
Google did not even release the number of books that it had digitized,
and by now that number is greatly out of date. It is obviously very
difficult to negotiate under these circumstances. The current
participating libraries are the only ones with influence over Google's
product in terms of how it serves libraries.
It's been my impression that Google has worked closely with those
libraries, but has mainly been in contact with the folks who negotiate
contracts, not with those who provide services to users. Google is,
however, bound to provide a licensed product to academic institutions
based on the settlement. Google also states publicly that it cares
very much about providing a quality product for those institutions. In
the end, that may not translate to what we think of as quality
metadata, but only if we express our needs can we later say: we told
you what we need; you could have easily provided it. It may not GET us
what we need, but I think an honest attempt on our part is the only
way to go.
--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Tue Sep 15 2009 - 02:01:15 EDT