The future of cataloging is taking shape, and the shape of things to come is being influenced by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative and the Semantic Web Community. What are the implications of the inclusion of these new “players” in the RDA process? What will be the effect on cataloging and the work of catalogers? Are catalogers ready to participate fully in this emerging new world? Presented by the MLA Technical Services Section.
Speaker: Diane L. Hillmann, Research Librarian, Cornell University Library
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative DCMI
Semantic Web Community
RDA: Resource Description and Access
I’d like to begin by saying that a lot of this is fairly new to me. Though I have read about some of this terminology, I have never applied it. What is exciting however, like several of the talks at the pre-conference is doing old things in new ways in a less proprietary manner with more local control. The world of bibliographic control I think has become stale and I think we have to try to get away from that awful word “control” and move to more cooperative approaches. My work as a cataloger, which I do pretty much full time is not always useful and transferable to my work at the reference desk. That could be because I don’t spend a lot of time on the reference desk or I have a terrible memory for LC subject headings or maybe it’s because the old catalog is stale. Well, I look forward to new things that may or may not happen before I retire from the library field. (these are the bloggers words)
Now to the talk. “I still think in MARC,” comments Diane. She goes on to say that time has moved on and that we are in the midst of exciting ferment with opportunities to manage change. The
Diane began cranking away at software developers 3 years ago She says she was a complainer but now is focused on building the technical infrastructure that RDA didn’t have.
What RDA is and isn’t. It isn’t linear. What is its starting point? It is in the last stages of development. Final full draft due in August and will be “published” in early 2009. Last summer DCMI folks joined with Semantic Web Community to move ahead with these semantics.
DCMI is in partnership with RDA to develop vocabularies.
Where are we going? RDA will be used to support the creation of FRBR based records and will be available to support catalogers and applications. Specialized communities will be building application profiles.
The journey is a series of maps. Envisioning new descriptive structures, supporting libraries and other communities of practice and “building in” support for future development and extension.
RDA is the successor to AACR2. RDVocabularies is the tool.
RDA development began with AACR3. AACR3 then was reorganized as RDA (FRBR). Invisible still RDA became explicitly FRBR/FRAR and no longer tied explicitly to MARC
The new RDA is a FRBR based approach to structuring bibliographic data, more explicitly machine-friendly linkages (preferably with URIs, Uniform Resource Identifiers), with a greater emphasis on relationship and roles, less reliance on cataloger created notes and text strings (particularly for identification)
Diane demonstrated a rather lengthy example of creating a RDA record with the DCMI approach. It will be posted elsewhere on the MLA Conference Website at a later date.
LC hopefully will be using vocabularies developed by DCMI. Rather than being managed centrally by one entity, management of vocabularies will be parsed out to entities (institutions, databases) that can better manage the information.
Is FRBR (around since 1998) the only model here? DCMI abstract model is a Dublin Core view of the world. URI relates out to other descriptions. Cataloging is moving to more related descriptions – i.e. a view of geo-referenced data. Traditionally catalogers transcribed information. The descriptors will reference the sources of information, i.e. Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names. It is importance that we work together to maintain databases and not create a lot of local data. Everybody will be taking responsibility and central database will be more forgiving.
ILSs have not been developing software for these models. They are waiting for this to be published. This will be open source and available without copyright.
Don’t we already do vocabularies? Our traditional vocabularies use text strings as identifiers. Numbers are used only for internal or intra-community transactions. Semantic Web uses vocabularies much more rigorously. NSTL is a vocabulary registry – www.metadataregistry.org Try out our sandbox – make up a vocabulary, play and see what other people have done.
Paper will be on the MLA conference website
Check out these application profiles:
SWAP
Collections Application Profile
The implications are an end to the closed library community, a different approach to standards and a library community that is more engaged with the web and not just talking to each other (other libraries are librarians)
Doris Madsen, Springfield City Library
Showing posts with label cataloging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cataloging. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
The Emerging Cataloging Future: RDA, DCMI, and the Semantic Web - Diane L. Hillmann
Diane Hillmann, Research Librarian at Cornell University and former project manager and Metadata Specialist for the National Science Digital Library Project presented an intense overview of RDA and FRBR, or at least it was for me, so forgive me for "dumbing down" this presentation, to summarize for those who are just beginning to learn about these changes in descriptive cataloging.
Hillman gave a brief history of the development of the emerging technical infrastructure which will carry library information from one stage to another, in other words from AACR2 to RDA and FRBR. She mentioned that the final full draft of RDA (Resource Description and Access) will be distributed in a Beta version soon, since it is difficult to review as text.
Hillmann mentioned that this transition is still in the planning stages, that the youngest librarians in the audience will gray during this process, and that there is no prototype to view. She mentioned that to start on this journey, it is essential to "give up an enormous backpack of past practices" but "bring the legacy of cataloging forward".
The FRBR model, the terms, and the approach are all incorporated into RDA. The new system emphasizes the relationships between a work, its manifestation, its expressions, then links to items owned, people who have some relation to the work, etc. The new system will have more machine-friendly linkages by managing text strings and URIs. Catalogers need to envision new descriptive structures, using software.
To learn more, I'm suggesting a visit to a few websites:
http://www.loc.gov/cds/downloads/FRBR.PDF
http://www.catalogingfutures.com/catalogingfutures/2008/05/index.htm
http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf
During Hillman's talk, she received a question from the audience:
"Since few of us are now doing original cataloging, but relying on cataloging sources, are those who provide us with cataloging, for example OCLC going to adopt this and when?"
Hillmann didn't know whether this is going to be adopted by large vendors, although she knew a few were exploring. There are many questions that need to be answered.
A graphic shown by Hillmann illustrated that text strings would be replaced by placing URIs in the typical MARC fields. These URIs, which would be maintained on the net by some authority would connect ideas to ideas.
A brief example:
Hillman gave a brief history of the development of the emerging technical infrastructure which will carry library information from one stage to another, in other words from AACR2 to RDA and FRBR. She mentioned that the final full draft of RDA (Resource Description and Access) will be distributed in a Beta version soon, since it is difficult to review as text.
Hillmann mentioned that this transition is still in the planning stages, that the youngest librarians in the audience will gray during this process, and that there is no prototype to view. She mentioned that to start on this journey, it is essential to "give up an enormous backpack of past practices" but "bring the legacy of cataloging forward".
The FRBR model, the terms, and the approach are all incorporated into RDA. The new system emphasizes the relationships between a work, its manifestation, its expressions, then links to items owned, people who have some relation to the work, etc. The new system will have more machine-friendly linkages by managing text strings and URIs. Catalogers need to envision new descriptive structures, using software.
To learn more, I'm suggesting a visit to a few websites:
http://www.loc.gov/cds/downloads/FRBR.PDF
http://www.catalogingfutures.com/catalogingfutures/2008/05/index.htm
http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf
During Hillman's talk, she received a question from the audience:
"Since few of us are now doing original cataloging, but relying on cataloging sources, are those who provide us with cataloging, for example OCLC going to adopt this and when?"
Hillmann didn't know whether this is going to be adopted by large vendors, although she knew a few were exploring. There are many questions that need to be answered.
A graphic shown by Hillmann illustrated that text strings would be replaced by placing URIs in the typical MARC fields. These URIs, which would be maintained on the net by some authority would connect ideas to ideas.
A brief example:
Author leads to a link
Work Title leads to a text string of the Title
Form of work leads to a link
Original language leads to a link of that work in that language
The links are not URLs, they are URIs. URIs are persistent. These are established by the scholarly community, committed to establishing more permanent authoritative thesauri. The library community is working with other agencies to establish these.
There are those, including Hillmann who have and are working to establish some standards. See
http://metadataregistry.org/vocabulary/list.html which illustrates the methods for registering concepts (entities and attributes).
Hillmann said several times that all of this is theoretical. There is no concrete example of this.
Hillmann felt that integrated library system (ILS) vendors are for the most part taking a "wait and see" attitude. She mentioned that Innovative, OCLC, and a few other vendors are taking some steps.
For the most part, it seems that the library community is also taking a "wait and see" attitude, since there is a shrinking population of the profession directly dedicated to original cataloging. However, Hillmann presented this as a change in the infrastructure of catalogs. Such an important development should get your serious attention in the next months when the final RDA is unveiled, and in the coming years as we see the implementation. Stay tuned. Thanks Diane for starting us on the journey!
Friday, May 4, 2007
RDA and FRBR: Next Bib things in Cataloging
When Library of Congress librarian Barbara B. Tillett speaks about RDA & FRBR she talks about saving time, sharing information ("interfilable and usable"), and serving the user better at the international level. Emphasis is on changing the terminology and simplifing the concepts. New elements will effect MARC21, especially the GMDs (material descriptions).
July-September 2008 - Draft due to be available.
Early 2009- First release
View/listen to a 3-minute demo of RDA Online: http://www.rdaonline.org
RDA (Resource Description and Access) will:
AACR2 uses old terminology and does not include the concepts for moving into a more electronic world.
Why present these standards? Because in the real world, what has been known as "cataloging" is being done by authors, publishers, students, etc. It is not all MARC21, but we need to use other schemas.
See Drafts and Docuements: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/rda.html
FRBR User Tasks, which are the reasons people use libraries:
Change is coming. Stay tuned.
July-September 2008 - Draft due to be available.
Early 2009- First release
View/listen to a 3-minute demo of RDA Online: http://www.rdaonline.org
RDA (Resource Description and Access) will:
- replace AACR2
- simplify cataloging code
- encourage worldwide use
- provide consistency
- address current problems with types of materials
- be principle-based
- support FRBR
- be web-based ("not linear, but a we-tool")
- be multinational
- enable users
- uses "take what you see" approach
AACR2 uses old terminology and does not include the concepts for moving into a more electronic world.
Why present these standards? Because in the real world, what has been known as "cataloging" is being done by authors, publishers, students, etc. It is not all MARC21, but we need to use other schemas.
See Drafts and Docuements: http://www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/rda.html
- Informal discussion: subscribe to RDA-L
- Formal comments: http://www.ala.org/ALCTS
FRBR (Fundamental Requirements for Bibliographic Records) is a thorough examination of anything that might ever be cataloged by thinking in terms of:
- work
- expressions
- manifestions
- items
FRBR User Tasks, which are the reasons people use libraries:
- Find
- Identify
- Select
- Obtain
Change is coming. Stay tuned.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Future of MARC: Challenges and opportunities of 21st century cataloging
Dr. William E. Moen, SLIS, Univ. of North Texas
Presentation will be available on the MLA website after the conference.
We'd better be showing our value to our users. What services do we need to provide in order to keep us from becomming marginalized.
Focus on the methods - what we don't want to do is to expose our really complex structures to our users. Don't need to know - we will marginalize ourselves even more if we insist on telling out users how these systems work.
Discussion is only partially about MARC
broader digital info landscape
oops - slide changed!
Catalogs are limited in light of all sorts of other resource discovery tools that are out there. if we don't accept this, we are not placing oursleves effectively in the market.
What do we mean when we say MARC?
>>>structural elements of the format - this may go away in favor of mark up language
>>>Metadata scheme as defined by MARC 21
Fields, subfields, indicators and their semantics.
Approaching MARC's future
>requirements for a record format / metatadata scheme
>Resonding to recent developments
>Looking at empirical data.
Thinking about requirements
what metadata scheme is appropriate? Granularity - lossless data mapping - don't want to lose the finer shades of meaning intrinsic to the original data. XML will be the basis for this
Transparency
McCallum/s 10 format attribures of MARC forward
XML
Granularity
Versatility
Extensibility
Modularity
Hierarch support
Crosswalks
Tools
Cooperative management
Pervasive
AT ALA 2007 there will be a program on furture of marc
Recent developments
FRBR - conceptural model for the bibliographic universe, according to Barbara Tillett
The aim of the frbr study was to produce a framework that would provide a clear, precistly stated understanding of bibliogrpahic info.
frbr model
entity-relationship modeling
what is it that the bib record aims to be about
User tasks - what is it that we expect the record to achieve in terms of answering user needs?
Find? Identify? Select? Obtain?
frbr is having an amazing impact on catalogs - new terminology and conceptural modes incorporated in
RDA
Statement on cataloging principles
Assisting in understandning better the range of relationships in the bib universe
Implementation in catalogs to improve user experience.
Next generation of description
RDA - Resouce description and access
Focus on guidelines fo rcontent creation
Separation from syntax or record format
move in RDA to be totally separate from record format.
Grassroots effort to address next generation loibrary catalog and data format (wikis for example)
Key development - use of the term metadata. how do we link up with other sources of metadata, commercial, museum descriptions, etc. We need to acknowledge that we don't have enough catalogers in the world to mark up everything that is good out there. We need to learn to accept metadata from other sources.
What do catalogers actually do with the MARC record?
a record is an artifact that can be examined. it's a result of the cataloging enterprise and includes loads of decisions that were made as to history of description in your library.
ou follow rules, standards, encode it in a MARC structure. MARC is very rich; it has over 2000 data structures. How do we use all of these? Is the richness exploited? There are about 500 places within MARC that can hold author/title info!
Did an analyis - 4% of all fields used accounted for 80% of occurences
96% of all fields acount for only 20% of occurrences
Dr.Moen did a project called MCDU (MARC content designation utilization)
Looked at the artifiact created and look at what is used, not used, how fields are used. Used the entire world cat database of over 56 million records. Set up a procedure to take apart the bib records in a mySQL databaswe. Needed to break down the records so they could meaningfully look at all parts of the records. Divided into LC records and non LC records. Separated out records by item type because some MARC tags are relevant only to the type of material they dscribe. See the slide presentation on the MLA website for details on the findings of this study.
Lots and lots of fields not used regulary. 16 fields are used commonly across all 10 formats. they are the usual ones 020, 050, 082, 100, 245, etc. Use this info to develop a core of kinds of info that is the most useful
Trying to conceptualize a change in trends of utilization
Presentation will be available on the MLA website after the conference.
We'd better be showing our value to our users. What services do we need to provide in order to keep us from becomming marginalized.
Focus on the methods - what we don't want to do is to expose our really complex structures to our users. Don't need to know - we will marginalize ourselves even more if we insist on telling out users how these systems work.
Discussion is only partially about MARC
broader digital info landscape
oops - slide changed!
Catalogs are limited in light of all sorts of other resource discovery tools that are out there. if we don't accept this, we are not placing oursleves effectively in the market.
What do we mean when we say MARC?
>>>structural elements of the format - this may go away in favor of mark up language
>>>Metadata scheme as defined by MARC 21
Fields, subfields, indicators and their semantics.
Approaching MARC's future
>requirements for a record format / metatadata scheme
>Resonding to recent developments
>Looking at empirical data.
Thinking about requirements
what metadata scheme is appropriate? Granularity - lossless data mapping - don't want to lose the finer shades of meaning intrinsic to the original data. XML will be the basis for this
Transparency
McCallum/s 10 format attribures of MARC forward
XML
Granularity
Versatility
Extensibility
Modularity
Hierarch support
Crosswalks
Tools
Cooperative management
Pervasive
AT ALA 2007 there will be a program on furture of marc
Recent developments
FRBR - conceptural model for the bibliographic universe, according to Barbara Tillett
The aim of the frbr study was to produce a framework that would provide a clear, precistly stated understanding of bibliogrpahic info.
frbr model
entity-relationship modeling
what is it that the bib record aims to be about
User tasks - what is it that we expect the record to achieve in terms of answering user needs?
Find? Identify? Select? Obtain?
frbr is having an amazing impact on catalogs - new terminology and conceptural modes incorporated in
RDA
Statement on cataloging principles
Assisting in understandning better the range of relationships in the bib universe
Implementation in catalogs to improve user experience.
Next generation of description
RDA - Resouce description and access
Focus on guidelines fo rcontent creation
Separation from syntax or record format
move in RDA to be totally separate from record format.
Grassroots effort to address next generation loibrary catalog and data format (wikis for example)
Key development - use of the term metadata. how do we link up with other sources of metadata, commercial, museum descriptions, etc. We need to acknowledge that we don't have enough catalogers in the world to mark up everything that is good out there. We need to learn to accept metadata from other sources.
What do catalogers actually do with the MARC record?
a record is an artifact that can be examined. it's a result of the cataloging enterprise and includes loads of decisions that were made as to history of description in your library.
ou follow rules, standards, encode it in a MARC structure. MARC is very rich; it has over 2000 data structures. How do we use all of these? Is the richness exploited? There are about 500 places within MARC that can hold author/title info!
Did an analyis - 4% of all fields used accounted for 80% of occurences
96% of all fields acount for only 20% of occurrences
Dr.Moen did a project called MCDU (MARC content designation utilization)
Looked at the artifiact created and look at what is used, not used, how fields are used. Used the entire world cat database of over 56 million records. Set up a procedure to take apart the bib records in a mySQL databaswe. Needed to break down the records so they could meaningfully look at all parts of the records. Divided into LC records and non LC records. Separated out records by item type because some MARC tags are relevant only to the type of material they dscribe. See the slide presentation on the MLA website for details on the findings of this study.
Lots and lots of fields not used regulary. 16 fields are used commonly across all 10 formats. they are the usual ones 020, 050, 082, 100, 245, etc. Use this info to develop a core of kinds of info that is the most useful
Trying to conceptualize a change in trends of utilization
This report will be published within the next couple of months.
To consider -whatis needed in a bib record? What is needed to support user tasks? Management of info resources? How do systems use the infrequently used data. What do we do about the 62% of all fields used in less that 1% of all records in OCLC WorldCat? Coding has to be done to prepare for these little used fields.
We need to rethink MARC in light of value? How can we justify the high cost of MARC? What is a 'real good' MARC record? How can we deal with the shrinking budgets if we are focus on this highly priced format? There are lots of metadata schemes; MARC won't be one of the choices!
Questions
What is the next step in the decision making process - in that 62% of fields used in 1% of records - who will decide if these should be kept or not? Who will make the decision?
Dr.Moen is doing these presentations, trying to get the info out to the community and the cataloging rules people. Start by looking at your own cataloging practices. To what extent do you use certain fields. Hopes for an open discussion even thoough we might not have a vote on the national level. Dr. Moen would like to 'freeze marc' right at this point so it can be further examined.
Question - can you map your commonly used fields to dublin core
Yes, can be done.
On Competition for Catalogs & Catalogers
Karen Calhoun, Sr. Assoc. University Librarian for Information Technology and Technical Services, Cornell University, wants you to think beyond traditional cataloging. She asked:
What is cataloging and what do catalogers do?
Karen encouraged participants to view: http://vivo.library.library.cornell.edu
Vivo is Cornell's virtual life sciences library: social networking & resources: metadata, pushed to the limit!
Proactive cataloging: Recycling and reuse is what Karen advocates. Workflow analysis and quality improvement. More is on her website.
Eyes are not on the library webpages, only 2% of college students start their research on the library page. When they do land on library pages, they see fragmented pages. Printed collections are being shipped to storage, so that students can use the library for space and a cup of coffee.
Needed is "interoperability" with other websites.
Classic cataloging philosophy: "Save the time for the reader"
In the past fifty years cataloging has seen great strides:
Library Hi Tech v.25 n.2
Preprint 17 December 2004
http://dspace.libary.cornell.edu/handle/1813/2231
Catalogers are well positioned to make contributions to the public they serve. Metadata is a strategic advantage and should share this with their communities. The mission is larger than cataloging, it is: knowledge, insight, action.
Her thesis: We need to rethink the catalog in light of a changed world!
What is cataloging and what do catalogers do?
Karen encouraged participants to view: http://vivo.library.library.cornell.edu
Vivo is Cornell's virtual life sciences library: social networking & resources: metadata, pushed to the limit!
Proactive cataloging: Recycling and reuse is what Karen advocates. Workflow analysis and quality improvement. More is on her website.
Eyes are not on the library webpages, only 2% of college students start their research on the library page. When they do land on library pages, they see fragmented pages. Printed collections are being shipped to storage, so that students can use the library for space and a cup of coffee.
Needed is "interoperability" with other websites.
Classic cataloging philosophy: "Save the time for the reader"
In the past fifty years cataloging has seen great strides:
- MARC, AACR, and LC
- Cooperative Cataloging
- Affordability and scalability
- More than descriptive metadata
- Metadata is strategic issue for libraries
Catalog librarians present and future have the ability to share their skills to go beyond library catalogs to being resource managers. Karen used the example of the Railroad describing its mission in a limited way. If the Railroads had looked at their mission as transportation, the poor performance of that service in the past century could have been avoided.
See more:Library Hi Tech v.25 n.2
Preprint 17 December 2004
http://dspace.libary.cornell.edu/handle/1813/2231
Catalogers are well positioned to make contributions to the public they serve. Metadata is a strategic advantage and should share this with their communities. The mission is larger than cataloging, it is: knowledge, insight, action.
Her thesis: We need to rethink the catalog in light of a changed world!
On competittion for catalogs and catalogers
Karen Calhoun - how cool it is that MLA Tech. Services got Karen here to speak. I went to the NETSL annual conpsyched ference in April and her report was a main topic of conversation. I'm really psyched to be able to hear her talk. I'll try to do it justice here
Karen's presentation will be on the MLA web site after the conference - go look at it - it's been great!
Report name: Changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf
Report has been controversial. KC will talk about why
Users are anot getting what they need from online libraries and catalogs
contect has changed
users have changed
library service model must change
catalog itself MUST change
implication - Cataloging MUST change
KC is doing a review of how we used to work - very divided among types of jobs. No longer relevant.
Being a 21st century librarian:
Technology driven research, teaching and learning
Disinntermediation (decrease in guided access to content)
Global 'infosphere'
Accelerating shift in information seekers' preferences for web-based information and multimedia formats.
Our current service mode is Geocentric - local catalog is the sun. New model is Heliocentric - local catalog is a planet. New is a use centered view rather than a library centered view.
Social networks - competition to catalogs. Next widespread network is "linked in" for business communities. These are not compatible with library catalogs. in april there were 5.8 million second life users. second life library and info island are 2 library related worlds within second life.
what we think of as cataloging has to change. Catalogers must change, too.
KC says that catalogers are the most flexible folks in the library profession - downsizing, local systems, constant rebuilding of serials checkins, batcholads, macros, etc. metadata, moving to offsite storage. Continue through all this to crank out the books and othermaterials that users demand.
Are we ready for the NEXT phase???????
A new kind of cataloger:
Examines assumptions
Be involved with information objects of all types
Move to next generation systems and services
Make info (inc. but not limted to library collections) more visible and easier to use
Metadata and beyond
Talking about Vivo at Cornel. http://vivo.library.cornell.edu/
Metadata pushed to the limit and even further
2% of students begin their information searches on their library web sites! the other 98% start with a web browser. Is this a crisis or an opportunity for librarians?
digitization projects are becomming more and more important - archival collections are becomming more important. Many libarians will begin to spend money on these. Catalogers need to learn about archives to reposnd to this.
A new way to work - Instead of being a hoarder of contations, the library muyst become the facilitator of retrieval and dissemination - William Wulf, 2003
Save the time of the reader - 4th law of Ranganathan, 1931.
Metadata - Cooperative cataloging - great time saver but geting more and more expensive. Metadata is a strategic issue for libraries. Library type metadata needs to be changed and this cannot be ignored.
Please see slides 24, 25 on the MLA web site - lots of info - too much to get down here.
Catalogers have accomplished much in the past successfully, but there is a danger of myopia in
the profession now. The catalog is not the only valid way to describe collections.
Slides 26, 27 talk about the future of the job of 'cataloging'. May not be called catalogers anymore - maybe metadata specialists. Lots of bluring of lines between public and technical services. Lots of team work that cross traditional lines. Great need for info technology knowledge.
See Library Hi Tech, v. 25, no2. Preprint 17 December 2004
Being a librarian: metadata and metadata specialists in the twenty-first century.
http://dspace.library.cornell.edu/handle/1813/2231
Karen's remarks today taken from this article.
Questions -
Is VIVO a public site?
Answer - Yes
Interesting that only 2% of students start with the library web site. However, it has been observed that 95% of librarians begin with a search engine, too.
Answer Karen agrees - important to look in the 'personalities' why people search how they search.
Question about metadata standards and what other kinds of skills and knowledge to future catalogers need.
Answer Reuse of metadata - stuf that comes from outside the library that we reuse - need to know how to do that. Workflow analysis and quality improvement (see slide 17 on the right hand side for an example) . People who can look at the big picture
Question about controlled headings - where is it going
LCSH - we can do better. If we can create tools that would link with LCSH and create an algorithmic approach that would be more creative. Move our approach away from one record at a time. Cataloging theory is becomming more relevant now that our 'tools' are expanding. Tradtional forms need to connect with new forms.
Comment - please get rid of 'Cookery'!
Question - What can Karen suggest as to how to train people who are working in cataloging right now to use metadata.
Answer - there are classes to be taken, but if you do that and come back and not use it of course you forget it. See article - Digital Collections on a shoestring. Try to find something in your library that you can digitize. try to figure out how to do something!
Comment: The mindset of metadata specialists - want to do the absolute best job - too often using blinkers and not looking at the process from beginning to end. Start at the beginning and work up to the 'handcrafted' best. Think of the process as a continuum to build up your skills. This is often a team based project - metadata specialst, librarian, IT.
Comments - we still are going to have to run the back end of things - ILL, patron links, all that functionality of the ILS, the behind the scenes management back ends. How will we link up to allthese back end workings?
This was a GREAT program. Thanks to MLA Tech.Services Section for getting it together.
Karen's presentation will be on the MLA web site after the conference - go look at it - it's been great!
Report name: Changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/calhoun-report-final.pdf
Report has been controversial. KC will talk about why
Users are anot getting what they need from online libraries and catalogs
contect has changed
users have changed
library service model must change
catalog itself MUST change
implication - Cataloging MUST change
KC is doing a review of how we used to work - very divided among types of jobs. No longer relevant.
Being a 21st century librarian:
Technology driven research, teaching and learning
Disinntermediation (decrease in guided access to content)
Global 'infosphere'
Accelerating shift in information seekers' preferences for web-based information and multimedia formats.
Our current service mode is Geocentric - local catalog is the sun. New model is Heliocentric - local catalog is a planet. New is a use centered view rather than a library centered view.
Social networks - competition to catalogs. Next widespread network is "linked in" for business communities. These are not compatible with library catalogs. in april there were 5.8 million second life users. second life library and info island are 2 library related worlds within second life.
what we think of as cataloging has to change. Catalogers must change, too.
KC says that catalogers are the most flexible folks in the library profession - downsizing, local systems, constant rebuilding of serials checkins, batcholads, macros, etc. metadata, moving to offsite storage. Continue through all this to crank out the books and othermaterials that users demand.
Are we ready for the NEXT phase???????
A new kind of cataloger:
Examines assumptions
Be involved with information objects of all types
Move to next generation systems and services
Make info (inc. but not limted to library collections) more visible and easier to use
Metadata and beyond
Talking about Vivo at Cornel. http://vivo.library.cornell.edu/
Metadata pushed to the limit and even further
2% of students begin their information searches on their library web sites! the other 98% start with a web browser. Is this a crisis or an opportunity for librarians?
digitization projects are becomming more and more important - archival collections are becomming more important. Many libarians will begin to spend money on these. Catalogers need to learn about archives to reposnd to this.
A new way to work - Instead of being a hoarder of contations, the library muyst become the facilitator of retrieval and dissemination - William Wulf, 2003
Save the time of the reader - 4th law of Ranganathan, 1931.
Metadata - Cooperative cataloging - great time saver but geting more and more expensive. Metadata is a strategic issue for libraries. Library type metadata needs to be changed and this cannot be ignored.
Please see slides 24, 25 on the MLA web site - lots of info - too much to get down here.
Catalogers have accomplished much in the past successfully, but there is a danger of myopia in
the profession now. The catalog is not the only valid way to describe collections.
Slides 26, 27 talk about the future of the job of 'cataloging'. May not be called catalogers anymore - maybe metadata specialists. Lots of bluring of lines between public and technical services. Lots of team work that cross traditional lines. Great need for info technology knowledge.
See Library Hi Tech, v. 25, no2. Preprint 17 December 2004
Being a librarian: metadata and metadata specialists in the twenty-first century.
http://dspace.library.cornell.edu/handle/1813/2231
Karen's remarks today taken from this article.
Questions -
Is VIVO a public site?
Answer - Yes
Interesting that only 2% of students start with the library web site. However, it has been observed that 95% of librarians begin with a search engine, too.
Answer Karen agrees - important to look in the 'personalities' why people search how they search.
Question about metadata standards and what other kinds of skills and knowledge to future catalogers need.
Answer Reuse of metadata - stuf that comes from outside the library that we reuse - need to know how to do that. Workflow analysis and quality improvement (see slide 17 on the right hand side for an example) . People who can look at the big picture
Question about controlled headings - where is it going
LCSH - we can do better. If we can create tools that would link with LCSH and create an algorithmic approach that would be more creative. Move our approach away from one record at a time. Cataloging theory is becomming more relevant now that our 'tools' are expanding. Tradtional forms need to connect with new forms.
Comment - please get rid of 'Cookery'!
Question - What can Karen suggest as to how to train people who are working in cataloging right now to use metadata.
Answer - there are classes to be taken, but if you do that and come back and not use it of course you forget it. See article - Digital Collections on a shoestring. Try to find something in your library that you can digitize. try to figure out how to do something!
Comment: The mindset of metadata specialists - want to do the absolute best job - too often using blinkers and not looking at the process from beginning to end. Start at the beginning and work up to the 'handcrafted' best. Think of the process as a continuum to build up your skills. This is often a team based project - metadata specialst, librarian, IT.
Comments - we still are going to have to run the back end of things - ILL, patron links, all that functionality of the ILS, the behind the scenes management back ends. How will we link up to allthese back end workings?
This was a GREAT program. Thanks to MLA Tech.Services Section for getting it together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
