« Weighing In On the 3rd LC Working Group Meeting | Main | More Library of Congress Working Group Testimony »

Tuesday, August 07, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Thanks for sharing, Christine. Nice job, too.


Christine - this is awesome. Well done.

Chris Schwartz

Thanks, you guys. I'm already thinking about things I left out or things I could have emphasized more. But overall, I think I was able to put together the gist of what I wanted to say.

Jonathan Rochkind

Nice comments, thanks. I agree with everything.

I think there's something additional to be said about the notion of 'identifiers' and authority files, but I've been trying to figure out how to say that for months now.

Bryan Campbell

Thanks for saying that not all catalogers are "obsessed with creating the perfect record."
Many of the catalogers that I know want to get it right but not at the expense of all else.

The Improbable Don Quijote

I am beginning to think that the Working Group should have asked you to speak rather than me--no one would interpret your remarks as a tilting against windmills. I lack the knack for speaking to those on other planets and am thrilled to see that you have such inter-planetary communication skills! Thanks so much for sending this and letting us read it too.

Stephanie Poole

Nicely done, Christine.

You said many of the things that I have wanted to say but didn't know how.



I think there's something additional to be said about the notion of 'identifiers' and authority files (end)

I think that's right too. Have you noticed Jonathan's latest blog post, Christine?

Again, let me say that this is the best thing I've seen from anybody so far - in terms of being able to say a lot of important stuff in a very condensed space.

Thanks again Christine.

Chris Schwartz

Hi Nathan. I just read Jonathan's post. I particularly like his concept of viewing authority control in terms of relationships. I wonder if the Working Group would accept input a couple of days after the deadline, if you wanted to submit something on identifiers and authority files. This is an area I definitely need to work on more.



I posted something on Jonathan's blog - I hope its clear (these issues get very complicated very quickly). I like what Jonathan says - and think this direction is inevitable and good, in many ways - but I just have some reservations and concerns. Probably because I'm the kind of guy that finds writing like this so dang persuasive:


I don't know if all that is what the Working Group (and someone chymes in: "um, nor anyone, Nathan) needs to hear now though! :)

Personally, I think we need to get you, Jonathan, Martha Yee, and Tim S. in charge of the library of Congress. :)

Walter Walker

This is an excellent piece of written testimony! I especially agree that all full-level members should be able to correct errors in records on OCLC. The original record should be as accurate as possible at the time of entry, and then others should be able to quickly correct it, so that we can eliminate much of our duplication of each other's record editing. We should also streamline MARC cataloging without taking away access points. We do need a more positive vision for cataloging before "doomsday" becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Scope of blog

  • The focus of this blog is the future of cataloging and metadata in libraries.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    July 2014

    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3 4 5
    6 7 8 9 10 11 12
    13 14 15 16 17 18 19
    20 21 22 23 24 25 26
    27 28 29 30 31    


    Future of Cataloging: Key Resources (to May 2008)

    Blog powered by Typepad
    Member since 04/2007