Cross-posting from Autocat. Sorry for the duplication. -- Jim
This discusses the updated OCLC policy at http://www.oclc.org/worldcat/catalog/policy/default.htm announced by David Whitehair.
---------------------------
There are two main points that struck me:
1) This all has to do with "Worldcat data" and I still don't see a
definition of it. The closest is:
"In connection with Agent's performance of the services specified in this
Agreement (the "Services") for Library, Library has made or will make
available to Agent copies of bibliographic data, library holdings and/or
other information representing Library's own holdings extracted from
WorldCat, the online database of such information maintained by OCLC Online
Computer Library Center, Inc. ("OCLC") and its members (hereinafter
"WorldCat Data")."
I still don't know what this means. If I download a record through regular
Z39.50 and *not* through OCLC, but the record has an 040 of:
|a CtY |c CtY |d MH |d DLC |d AIP |d NST |d AIP |d NST |d NSDP |d NST |d
MH |d NST |d DLC |d NST |d InU |d DLC |d NST |d MH |d FU |d MiU |d NSDP |d
WaU |d MiU |d OCoLC |d CU-S |d DLC |d OCoLC
Is this record "WorldCat data"? If so, why does OCoLC trump Yale and LC and
Harvard and everybody else? It still seems as if OCLC is claiming ownership
over records because they travel over their wires.
2) In Section D. WorldCat's Viability and Value, and the Need for a Policy,
there is:
"If the database does not receive the continued organizational support of
OCLC members, there is a very real danger that it will become fragmented and
lose its integrity, that its quality will be diminished, and that,
consequently, its utility to the OCLC cooperative will be reduced."
I don't know what "integrity" means here, while the quality of the records
has already diminished and is diminishing as we speak. In any case, the
concept of "quality" needs to be reconsidered in an environment that is
truly networked, the environment we are entering now. For quite some time
there have been records cataloged in languages other than English in
Worldcat, with subjects and description in all kinds of languages. This
seems to be a loss of integrity and/or quality, or something!
But more important is the concern that the database will become
"fragmented." I ask: First, is this such a bad thing, and second, is it
inevitable anyway? Web2.0 and 3.0 are founded on the concept of each
individual being able to personalize her or her "virtual space," and
fragmentation becomes an essential part of that.
The policy is a noble effort by all concerned, but it still seems as if OCLC
is claiming ownership over the individual records in the database, and also
they seem to be drawing a line in the sand: we will change up to this point,
but no more.
I think we need flexibility.
James Weinheimer j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu
Director of Library and Information Services
The American University of Rome
via Pietro Roselli, 4
00153 Rome, Italy
Received on Thu Apr 08 2010 - 04:34:22 EDT