I just thought of something funny...
Google has gotten a *lot* of static from the library community about the Google book settlement.
And now the library community wants Google to play nice and use library metadata in a certain way in GBS that would benefit libraries.
There's just a little bit of irony there.
Bernie Sloan
Subject: Re: Library functions and GBS
From: "Dobbs, Aaron"
Reply-To: Next generation catalogs for libraries
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:50:44 -0400
Content-Type: text/plain
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (18 lines)
Long story short, this is where social engineering (in the positive sense) comes in.
Is there a list of the people involved in the GBS project at Google? (sure there is)
Do we have librarians who can explain library-record minutiae in their area? (heh, yes)
Do we know people (who may know people) who can connect the ngc4lib community (or at least a few of our members) with people working on the data-side in the GBS project? (this is the real question)
We certainly have people knowledgeable enough to explain the various data elements in library records and systems; we (librarians who can explain our insanely detailed (in a good way) data) just need to connect with the GBS project people who might not currently grok the importance of a certain field or the nuances of the myriad subfield mysteries.
The trick will be actually getting it done (without being all scary & stalker-ish)
-Aaron
:-)'
Quoting "B.G. Sloan" <[log in to unmask]>:
> 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)?
Received on Wed Sep 16 2009 - 11:17:47 EDT