Is a long book a better book?
Why not look at (and adapt) the ONIX Specification P.11, P.15, and P.17 data constructs, that deal with quantitative measures like the number of illustrations, the number of prizes awarded, etc., to a title. After all, if a picture is worth a thousand words, think of how bloated these quantitative indicators could be!
Ted
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of B.G. Sloan
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 10:48 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] our profession's bibliographic information
Eric said:
"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.'"
Isn't there already data in a bib record the could let you to do this, i.e., number of pages?
--- On Tue, 12/21/10, Eric Lease Morgan <emorgan_at_ND.EDU> wrote:
> From: Eric Lease Morgan <emorgan_at_ND.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] our profession's bibliographic information
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Date: Tuesday, December 21, 2010, 10:30 AM
> 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"
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized use, copying, disclosure, or distribution of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited by the sender and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail.
Received on Tue Dec 21 2010 - 11:01:54 EST