All presentations from the PALINET Future of Cataloging Symposium, held on Thursday May 29, 2008, are now available for download. This includes all slide presentations and audio recordings from each presenter.
I can't believe I actually sound coherent! Enjoy. It was a fun day and I'm looking forward to listening to the presentations I missed. (There were 4 afternoon speakers in 2 time slots, so we had to choose.)
Via PALINET
ALCTS Forum
Moving Library Services to the Network Level
January 14, 2008
Speakers: Matt Goldner, Karen Calhoun, Diana Brooking, Glenn Patton
One of the necessary skills for future catalogers/metadata librarians is the ability to think creatively about metadata and how we communicate with our users. I really liked this forum. Instead of giving us all the answers, the OCLC presenters posed questions and invited us to think creatively about how we could take metadata management to the Web.
I was surprised that the Wikipedia model for WorldCat metadata enrichment was unthinkable to a couple of the catalogers at the forum. The cataloging community desperately needs to step back, set aside economics and current workflows, and imagine a different way of doing things. These PowerPoint slides with the speakers' notes contain the kind of questions we need to be asking ourselves.
I know I'm supposed to be baking Christmas cookies or something, but this latest development in the future of cataloging debate is way too interesting.
Last weekend, Lorcan Dempsey posted a letter from Karen Calhoun, OCLC's official response to the LC working group final draft report. It's really essential reading--a succinct summary of OCLC's thoughts on these issues, their own plans for the future, and the role they can play as a collaborative partner with the Library of Congress and others.
And then yesterday, Rob Styles of Talis posts his response to Calhoun and OCLC. He looks at OCLC's business model in relation to the concept of the starfish and the spider--taken from a book with that title. It's an interesting book (I just started reading it) on decentralizing organizations.
Rob argues that OCLC is in the postion to step in where LC use to reign, as the leader for library metadata services. He goes to suggest that OCLC needs to "let go of control" on several fronts--adoptingsuggesting a more decentralized business model. That is--becoming a starfish rather than staying a spider.
I wrote this post almost 2 weeks ago on the back of the LC working group report, but it got lost in the shuffle. Anyway, this theme (or meme) is in the air right now, so here goes. As I read the report, I keep thinking that a significant part of our redundancy problems lie with OCLC's model. It's not conducive to collaboration.
I work with OCLC WorldCat everyday, and there seem to be a lowering of standards with regard to the quality of the records that are dumped into the database. If OCLC is lowering its standards, then why can't we modify data in OCLC? They need to open up the editing capabilities and let us (the members) add to and enrich all the records in WorldCat.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be guidelines about what we should and shouldn't modify. But OCLC needs to start trusting the library community. Let quality control and added value be a collaborative effort. With the current model, we aren't taking full advantage the skills of the library community. Currently, we are very limited as to what we can correct or enhance. It feels like a straitjacket.
The OCLC leadership talks the talk. Vice President, Karen Calhoun, has frequently argued that we need to have a different understanding of "quality." And Roy Tennant writes:
So here's the thing: you may or may not have noticed it, but we just went from a world where we were the gatekeepers to information to one in which we are hanging on for dear life. We can either wise up or get out of the game. I prefer to wise up. For me this means forgetting about "control" and getting good about "enrichment". [emphasis mine]
So, my message to OCLC is--throw caution to the wind and let us cataloger-types get in on some of this collaborative Web 2.0 lifestyle! Let us correct data. Let us enrich data. WorldCat will be a better resource for it.
Related: Open WorldCataloging?
OCLC's web based interface to WorldCat, WorldCat.org, is becoming an interesting resource. I think it is a tool that catalogers and metadata librarians can use in creative ways. For example, one of the catalogers I work with searches for serials records in WorldCat.org before using Connexion. He likes the clean, simple interface and the fact that you can see other libraries' serials holdings. Another cataloger I work with suggested looking for call numbers from other libraries when the master record in WorldCat is missing one. Because it links to member libraries' online catalogs it's a good way to find bibliographic data beyond the master record. Recently, I found a record missing the call number and LC subject headings completed in a library's local catalog. WorldCat.org would be an even better cataloging tool if it had a MARC display. So try adding it to your list of web based cataloging applications.
UPDATE: Someone from OCLC was kind enough to clue me in to the fact that WorldCat.org is directly accessible through Connexion. They added this functionality last year. When a record is displayed in Connexion, go to the View menu and choose "Find in a Library." WorldCat.org will open in your default browser to that record. Very cool!
Via ERATS: On June 22, 2007, the University of California Libraries announced it will be replacing their ILS, Melvyl, with OCLC WorldCat Local in a pilot project. When the infamous "UC Report" came out in December 2005, the idea of replacing the local OPAC with OCLC seemed like an extreme, radical idea and, in fact, the report described it as the "radical scenario". Here we are almost 2 years later and the ILS landscape is starting to look vastly different. The radical scenario appears more utilitarian--just one among several strategies for library catalog relevance and survival.
In the Demise of the Local Catalog, Roy Tennant calls for the local library catalog to be relegated to the back room "where it belonged and a unified finding tool be put in its place." I struggle with the idea of abandoning local catalogs because of my background in theological libraries, and to a lesser extent, special collections. Theological libraries, as special libraries, have a clear mission, focus, and user group. When cataloging, I've always had to add subject headings to bibliographic records to enhance them for our users. I imagine this added value would be lost if we relied on the master records in OCLC WorldCat as replacements for the local catalog?
On the flip side, the Open Library, a new wiki catalog, is calling on anyone and everyone to add to and embellish bibliographic records. If OCLC really wants to "get with it" they'll open up the editing functions for OCLC WorldCat, so that all member libraries can add value to any part of the bibliographic record. Current OCLC quality control practice seems almost Draconian in a Web 2.0 environment. So, how about implementing "Open WorldCataloging" along with Open WorldCat?
This weekend, OCLC will be implementing Z39.50 cataloging enhancements. This will include institution records from libraries migrating from RLIN (RLG union catalog) to OCLC.
"As part of the combining with RLG, OCLC is adding Connexion and Z39.50 Cataloging functionality that supports the RLG concept known as clustering. OCLC is continuing with the master record concept, but is adding the ability to link institution records to the master record. Institution records contain additional cataloging data, such as local call numbers, holdings locations within the institution, or local or copy-specific notes. As an option, unique information in institution records is indexed and available for searching along with WorldCat indexes."
"Connexion browser and Z39.50 Cataloging support for institution records will be installed on May 20, 2007. NOTE: Connexion browser access to institution record indexing will be available mid-June 2007. Connexion client support for IRs is planned for late June 2007, as part of client version 2.00. For more information about client version 2.00, see Client Enhancements."
"See also Technical Bulletin 254: OCLC-MARC Format Update 2007 and Institution Records to Accommodate the RLG Union Catalog http://www.oclc.org/support/documentation/worldcat/tb/254/ for details."
Via PALINET CAT
Recent Comments