Cataloging Futures

LC's bibliographic record production study: two draft surveys

Ruth Fischer of R2 Consulting reports that there are two draft surveys available for this MARC record study. Within the next couple of weeks these surveys will be online.

Here's the link to the draft surveys. I printed off the one for libraries: it's 24 pages long.

By the way, David Bigwood mentioned last month that there's an RSS feed for the Bibliographic Record Production blog posts. The familiar orange icon for the feed is buried at the bottom of the Blogs page. Anyway, thanks David, having the feed makes it much easier to follow this study!

New David Bade paper: Irresponsible Librarianship

Nathan Rinne was kind enough to point out that David Bade has a new paper out: Irresponsible Librarianship: a critique of the report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control and thoughts on how to proceed.

This paper discusses the three guiding principles of the report of the LC Working Group and discusses some of the contradictions and problems with the recommendations. The Report focuses entirely on technical systems and does not deal at all with problems of human communication. The Report urges reuse of metadata but legacy data is a continuing problem rather than a solution. The report urges cooperation but offers a model of exploitation and reliance. The report assumes that all differences in information creation and use will be no problem for if we demand that everyone accept our (?) standards we can accept metadata as is. The report denies that service to sophisticated users is of value to the larger community. The paper closes with remarks on the future of music librarianship.

LC's bibliographic record production study: join the discussion

Anne Welsh pointed out that:

R2 Consulting, who are conducting the study, have set up a Ning community to keep interested parties up-to-date and, presumably, solicit opinion. Sign-up is free. There’s not much on there yet, but it’s early days …

Here's the blurb from R2 Consulting:

The Library of Congress has retained R2 Consulting, LLC to research and describe the US and Canadian “marketplace” for cataloging records and we need your help. Please join this network to stay abreast of our progress and to offer advice and perspective on our work.

Library of Congress to investigate bibliographic record production

Important news from the Library of Congress:

The Library of Congress today announced the next phase of its investigation into the creation and distribution of bibliographic data in U.S. and Canadian libraries. The Library has commissioned a study to research and describe the current marketplace for cataloging records in the MARC format, with primary focus on the economics of current practices, including existing incentives and barriers to both contribution and availability. The study will be carried out by R2 Consulting LLC of Contoocook, N.H....

Full press release here.

Via Open Access News

Library of Congress merges acquisitions and cataloging

This press release describes the merger of acquisitions and cataloging functions at the Library of Congress:

"The new organizational structure--the Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access Directorate (ABA)--fully merges acquisitions and cataloging functions, streamlines workflows and deploys staff to take advantage of their unique language and subject skills," said ABA Director Beacher Wiggins. He noted that the new organization will be better designed and staffed to acquire new digital materials, which will be processed in the same work units as collections in printed and other formats.

The merger of acquisitions and cataloging functions ends an older industrial model of work, in which an incoming book moved slowly along an assembly line of stand-alone acquisitions and processing units. Twenty years ago, staff in Order, Exchange and Gift or Cataloging in Publication divisions acquired a title and then handed it off to highly specialized librarians in separate Descriptive Cataloging and Subject Cataloging divisions for description, subject analysis, classification and assignment to a particular place on a shelf. Whole-book cataloging, which merged descriptive- and subject-cataloging functions in the early 1990s, began the trend toward centralized processing to eliminate duplicative efforts and speed up "throughput"--the time it takes to make a new book findable by catalog users and to get it on the shelf to be served to readers.

Free cataloging and metadata training manuals from LC

Last year I mentioned how much I'd learned taking the cataloging and metadata training programs developed by the Library of Congress. Well, now the training materials for these workshops are free via the Cataloging and Distribution Service (CDS)! Here's a list of what's available:

Cataloging Skills (CCT)

* Basic Creation of Name and Title Authorities
* Basic Subject Cataloging Using LCSH
* Fundamentals of Series Authorities
* Fundamentals of Library of Congress Classification

The Digital Library Environment (Cat21)

* Digital Project Planning & Management Basics
* Metadata and Digital Library Development
* Metadata Standards and Applications
* Principles of Controlled Vocabulary and Thesaurus Design
* Rules and Tools for Cataloging Internet Resources

Continuing Resources (SCCTP)

* Advanced Serials Cataloging
* Basic Serials Cataloging
* Electronic Serials Cataloging
* Integrating Resources Cataloging
* Serials Holdings

Letter from Deanna Marcum on RDA

A letter from Deanna Marcum was just posted to the AUTOCAT list. It provides the joint statement of the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Agricultural Library on Resource Description and Access. Some excerpts:

The three national libraries agreed on the following approach: First, we jointly commit to further development and completion of RDA. Second, following its completion, a decision to implement the rules will be based upon the positive evaluation of RDA's utility within the library and information environment, and criteria reflecting the technical, operational, and financial implications of the new code. This will include an articulation of the business case for RDA, including benefits to libraries and end users and cost analyses for retraining staff and re-engineering cataloging processes.

Together, we will:

• Jointly develop milestones for evaluating how we will implement RDA
• Conduct tests of RDA that determine if each milestone has been reached; paying particular attention to the benefits and costs of implementation
• Widely distribute analyses of benefits and costs for review by the U.S. library community
• Consult with the vendor and bibliographic utility communities to address their concerns about RDA

Included among the tests that will be developed to assist in formulating implementation decisions:

• Usability testing with cataloging staff, i.e. librarians and technicians, experienced and newer staff from the three national libraries in consultation with representatives from the U.S. library community (including OCLC and library vendors) about its participation in the process
• Testing of records for a broad array of materials created during usability studies to determine compatibility with existing record sets and ensuring records are usable and understandable for our end users
• Testing the feasibility of integrating this new cataloging standard into all relevant technology systems

The three institutions agreed that these steps will be followed and, if there is a decision to implement RDA, that the implementation would not occur before the end of 2009.

UPDATE: Letter and joint statement [pdf] now available on the LC Working Group website.

Thomas Mann's response to the LC working group report

Thomas Mann responses to the LC Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control report in his new paper: "On the Record" but Off the Track [pdf]. This 38-page paper is a must-read for the future of cataloging debate.

Some much needed future of cataloging humor

I like to stay current on what the LC staff are thinking about this whole future of cataloging debate. So, I often check the Library of Congress Professional Guild's future of cataloging web page.

Here's a new addition: "Steroid" Scandal Rocks Major League Libraries by Daniel Cohen. This tongue-in-cheek look at the current discussion is priceless. Gimme some of that street-grade metadata!

Many feel that the cost factor will limit future creation of such “pharmaceutical grade” metadata. According to Library Science experts, the discontinued support of “metadata laboratories” at institutions like the Library of Congress will eventually cause the supply of high quality metadata to dry up. “When you no longer have places like the Library of Congress creating this powerful stuff, you will see the performance of library searching systems come back down to the level that nature intended,” said one anti-metadata activist.

Some commentators feel that the crackdown on high-quality metadata labs is wrongheaded. “We have seen that this stuff works to enhance performance. Why not make the top quality stuff available to everyone? That’s the only way to really level the playing field,” says metadata advocate Harley Trion. “If we close down the labs creating high-quality metadata, you will see widespread adoption of street-quality metadata like social tagging and folksonomies, because that’s all you will be able to get. I’d rather know that my kids were using metadata that is made in a clean lab with experts and quality assurance processes than have them experimenting with street-grade metadata of unknown origin and quality.”

LC working group (final) final report now available!

The Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control's final report is now available [pdf].

Over on the AUTOCAT list, one of the working group members, Janet Swan Hill, writes:

Both arising from comments, and arising from the continuation of work we had already contemplated, the final report will contain some substantive changes from the draft, including some additional recommendations, and some modified recommendations. [emphais mine]

So, I'm going to give it a careful read and I'm sure you will to. I'll try to weigh in soon!