On 10/10/13 3:19 AM, James Weinheimer wrote:
>
> Exactly. The instances where libraries have put their information into
> the linked data universe have made no difference at all.
Jim, before you throw out the baby with the bathwater, consider that the
linked data universe is a two-way street, and some folks are starting to
take advantage of that. Try some searches in the linked catalog at FAO:
http://aims.fao.org/openagris
where data is pulled into the display that provides supporting
information for the actual article or report being displayed, based on
data in that article.
And try a search at:
https://apps.facebook.com/worldcat/
and when you get your results, click on "related people and topics".
That shows you what links you get using the linked data that is in
WorldCat today, and that's without identifiers for places or other types
of data that are available for linking.
I don't know what your vision of linked data is, but it can provide
simple services like book covers and author bios, or it can be big and
complex. In some instances it may just be a standardized replacement for
some of the APIs people use today. In others, like the use that is made
of it by the BBC web site, it really becomes a way to generate whole
pages of information around a topic. Don't think of it as a library
standard -- it's a data standard, and it's being heavily used as such.
It doesn't have to dominate the library view of its data, but we would
be foolish not to make use of it.
kc
> Why should we expect anything different in the future? Is it because
> RDA implementation provides the newest records (and only the newest
> records) with relator terms for authors? (This means that headings
> don't have just, e.g. "Melville, Herman, 1819-1891." but "Melville,
> Herman, 1819-1891. author" or "Hitchcock, Alfred,**1899-1980.
> director"--but then again the records may not because it's all
> optional! There are perhaps hundreds of other possible epithets, e.g.
> "writer of added text" or "editor of compilation") Perhaps it will
> make a difference because the newest records (and only the newest
> records) will have WEMI information? (This means that it will say,
> e.g. not just "Melville, Herman, 1819-1891. Moby Dick" but
> "Abridgement of (work): Melville, Herman, 1819-1891. Moby Dick" There
> are lots of possible WEMI terms here too, while everything is still
> optional!)
>
> To add this level of detail takes more time to make an individual
> record of course, and to do so retrospectively on the millions of
> records already done (with multiple headings per record) would be to
> undertake a retrospective conversion of records on a scale never even
> contemplated, at least in modern times. The change to AACR2 headings
> was miniscule in comparison. (In my researches at Princeton
> University, I discovered they recataloged the entire collection a few
> times until the 1870s when the library consisted of less than, I
> believe 30,000-40,000 volumes)
>
> But I guess we are supposed to believe the RDA changes will make a
> major positive difference to the public.
>
> On the other hand, I am still considering the interview that Jan
> mentioned where Scott Wasinger of EBSCO said, "I will say the next big
> shift in the library world will be the fall of the traditional catalog
> and the corresponding rise of fully-integrated and far superior
> discovery services."
> and
> "More and more libraries are using EBSCO Discovery Service (EDS) for
> the very reasons the industry as a whole will soon reach a point where
> discovery services supplant traditional catalogs. Taking patron driven
> acquisition of ebooks as just one example: going the catalog route,
> libraries must expend limited resources to customize, load, reload,
> remove, add, and replace MARC records; going the EDS route, libraries
> are able to eliminate these MARC record costs and deliver a much
> better experience to users, as the ebooks are made discoverable and
> accessible immediately with no dependency on MARC records."
> http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/09/events/qa-scott-wasinger-vice-president-of-sales-for-ebooks-and-audiobooks-at-ebsco-publishing/
>
>
> I assume that when Mr. Wasinger says "MARC records" he means
> "library-created records" so when he mentions eliminating "MARC record
> costs" he is *really* talking about eliminating something else that is
> of deep personal interest to members of this and other
> cataloger-related lists. Of course, he is a salesman "Vice President
> of Sales for eBooks and Audiobooks" and his job is to sell his
> product. I have read several reviews of EBSCO's discovery service and
> it is not so universally beloved by the public.
>
> Still, he may be right in general terms since we can see the current,
> unfortunate direction the library catalog is going. After all, it is
> not catalogers who decide these matters, but administrators who have
> to nurse disappearing budgets and much of EBSCO's advertising copy
> will sound very good to them. Sad, it doesn't have to be that way, but
> first we would have to reconsider what it is that the library catalog
> *really* offers the public. If it turns out that the library catalog
> is not fulfilling its function and is broken beyond repair, then I
> would agree: do away with it. But it (i.e. library-created records)
> should be given a real, fighting chance.
>
> RDA, FRBR and linked data are wrong directions.
>
--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Thu Oct 10 2013 - 11:15:37 EDT