On Dec 21, 2010, at 9:52 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> What Eric called "qualitative" data I call "text", I think. Even the
> page numbers are buried in text. The only "data" we have is in the
> fixed fields, and as we know there are many people who feel that those
> are not an important part of the cataloging process. (I bet they are a
> real pain to code, as well.) If we could provide more data, less text,
> what would that look like?
In the context of my previous message, there are two types of data: 1) quantitative, and 2) qualitative. The former is applicable to mathematical processes. The later is not.
For example, dates can greater or less than other dates. Dates can be averaged. Dates can be graphed. The closest thing we have to quantitative information in our bibliographic records are dates and number of pages. The later -- qualitative data -- is not applicable to mathematics. Authors. Titles. Subjects. Notes. Yes, a person can add and subtract the sum of all author names but such information describes the collection, not the works themselves. The balance of data in our bibliographic data is administrative in nature. ISSN. ISBN. Control numbers. Call numbers. Etc. This data does little to assist the reader.
The situation does not have to be so unbalanced. If we insisted on full text, then we could include additional quantitative information in our bibliographic records. The best example is number of words. If a library knew how long each book was in terms of number of words, then a library could tell a patron, "This book is longer than most," or "This book is very short." Given full text, libraries could benchmark things like grade levels and readability scores. Libraries could then offer interfaces such as, "Here are a number of short books for high school students on the topic of astronomy written (not published) in the the 1800s, and these have been read a significant number of times."
Quantitative information lends itself to a greater degree of objective interpretation and comparison. It lends itself to graphing, charting, and visualization. Illustrations based on numbers are more efficient than pure qualitative information -- "A picture is worth a thousand words."
Getting to this point is an incremental process:
1) dump all our bibliographic records to file
2) read a record
3) find a digital version on the 'Net
4) mirror the digital version locally
5) analyze the digital version to extract quantitative information
6) update the record
7) go to Step #2 for all records
7) re-index
8) provide additional services and interfaces to the index as well as the item
We can begin with our books. The next step can take in open access journals. The step after that can include blogs and other open content apropos to our collections.
Our profession needs to get with the program. We are not meeting patron expectations. The services of librarians are truly noble and laudable, but since there are so many institutions who are willing to provide similar services, these services are no longer seen as public good necessarily supported by a government or over-arching institution. Much of the profession will fade unless we re-tool ourselves. Making our data easier to use -- putting it in a form usable by people outside our club -- is one way to accomplish this goal. Describing things quantitatively is a particular example.
--
Eric Lease Morgan
University of Notre Dame
"Take the Great Books Survey -- http://bit.ly/auPD9Q"
Received on Tue Dec 21 2010 - 10:30:48 EST