Re: OCLC response to SkyRiver lawsuit

From: marijane white <mkwhite4_at_nyob>
Date: Sat, 7 Aug 2010 09:59:32 -0700
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Daniel CannCasciato <
Daniel.CannCasciato_at_cwu.edu> wrote:

> To add to the reasons: leadership. For example, the mentality that the
> changes (enhancements, corrections) aren't important, not locally, not at
> all. We've got a somewhat confused discussion in the profession these days.
> Many call for acceptance of whatever data can be purchased while others are
> talking about a continuous, or at least a somewhat long term and sporadic,
> enhancement process to the data. I support the latter, which is the only way
> the first is reasonably functional. But many in administrative roles (for
> the most part in that arena, but not solely) call for the acceptance
> approach to lousy data.
>
>
When I was still in library school, I wondered why nobody's tried applying
revision control management to cataloging records (that I'm aware of,
anyway).  I guess now I know why....?


-marijane
Received on Sat Aug 07 2010 - 13:00:20 EDT