Guys,
I'm not impressed. My rant isn't designed to tick people off, nor to
say that you are all worthless and are going to die. Why haven't
anyone picked up the challenges and explained to me in no uncertain
terms why we need catalogers in the future? It's such a simple
question, you shouldn't be avoiding it, and there should be plenty of
easy answers.
Now, Julie's example of bad meta data in Google Books is a better one,
but it only takes us so far ; it exemplifies meta data that's easy for
folks and spot, and easy for Google to fix, just slap a report button
on there, and they'll fix it. This is 245$a stuff, the most used field
and subfield in meta data history.
This is trivial stuff. You don't need a cataloger and definitely not a
cataloging specialists for this sort of stuff. The question is why we
need those meta data / cataloging specialists? What part of the future
do they fit into?
(Btw, just because Google wants to hire one librarian does not mean
they're hiring en mass, which was my assertion)
Regards,
Alex
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
Received on Thu Apr 22 2010 - 17:38:17 EDT