Additional reports and presentations from the Spring Assembly May 7, 2008.
Brian Schottlaender (UCSD) "On the Record"; The Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control
The Library of Congress, in response to the evolving information and technology environment, convened the Future of Bibliographic Control Working Group to examine the future of bibliographic description in the 21st century. As a member of the working group, Schottlaender will discuss the group’s final report and the implications and ramifications of the report or the UC libraries.
Referred to in presentation:
On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control
presented: January 9, 2008
Thomas Mann. “'On the Record’ but Off the Track” - a response on behalf of the Library of
Congress Professional Guild
LC’s Cataloging Policy and Support Office has issued decisions regarding LCSH
http://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/pre_vs_post.pdf
Showing posts with label Library of Congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Library of Congress. Show all posts
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Questions for Brian
Note: I didn't get good notes on all of the recommendations (controversial and not) that he mentioned; but it would be worthwhile looking at the slides after they get posted.
questions for Brian...
q) As much as Google was involved, did they focus on things that were not text?
a) They actually focussed a lot on text, particularly the implications of millions of digitized texts (google books)
It was really OCLC that was pushing the non-textual issue
q) Regardless of LC's approach, are there any implications for local or UC actions?
a) taking fuller and earlier advantage of acquisitions vendors biblibliographic info (e.g. onix data). How do we produce native XML?
Integrating acquisitions and cataloging depts more is natural; and parsing the overall responsbility for particular kinds of materials is something we've flirted with but never really done well. SCP might help us with that.
q) could you comment on the recommendation to strengthen the LIS profession via library schools?
a) the head of the committee was an LIS professor... we went back and forth about recommendations on teaching cataloging; the ALA office of accreditation included a requirement that "information organization" broadly construed be a requirement for accreditation. Also: wouldn't it be nice if we worked with the LIS researchers to work on research projects that were actually helpful in the working library world?
questions for Brian...
q) As much as Google was involved, did they focus on things that were not text?
a) They actually focussed a lot on text, particularly the implications of millions of digitized texts (google books)
It was really OCLC that was pushing the non-textual issue
q) Regardless of LC's approach, are there any implications for local or UC actions?
a) taking fuller and earlier advantage of acquisitions vendors biblibliographic info (e.g. onix data). How do we produce native XML?
Integrating acquisitions and cataloging depts more is natural; and parsing the overall responsbility for particular kinds of materials is something we've flirted with but never really done well. SCP might help us with that.
q) could you comment on the recommendation to strengthen the LIS profession via library schools?
a) the head of the committee was an LIS professor... we went back and forth about recommendations on teaching cataloging; the ALA office of accreditation included a requirement that "information organization" broadly construed be a requirement for accreditation. Also: wouldn't it be nice if we worked with the LIS researchers to work on research projects that were actually helpful in the working library world?
Future of Bibliographic Control
Presented by Brian Schottlaender of UCSD. The Library of Congress convened the Future of Bibliographic Control Working Group to examine the future of bibliographic descriptions in the 21st century. Schottlaender is discussing the group's final report and the implications and ramifications of the report for the UC Libraries.
Poor guy, he gets to follow Stephen, lunch and will speak about cataloging!
His speech could be titled Cataloging 3.0 - it's all about being more collaborative, fast,
Charge was to present findings at how bibliographic controls could affect access and management. Public hearings March - July 2007. Held at Google, Library of Congress and ALA headquarters. Invited 20 presentations speaking as individuals or on behalf of institutions. Draft report issued in November of 2007. Issued for public comment. Reviewed with LC management and presented to LC staff. Presentation was web cast. Report was revised quite substantially. Final report was presented January 2008.
Audience is LOC, others in the bibliographic sphere, policy and decision makers.
3 Guiding Principles:
RDA is the successor to AACR2. It's being developed in isolation and in groups.
One recommendation - be less agnostic about cataloging rules. Strong recommendations about getting some user behavior to learn how to best to bibliographic authority work.
Cataloger group at Netflix wants to share their work with us and we certainly want to take advantage of all this work being done but they need tools to do this.
Poor guy, he gets to follow Stephen, lunch and will speak about cataloging!
His speech could be titled Cataloging 3.0 - it's all about being more collaborative, fast,
Charge was to present findings at how bibliographic controls could affect access and management. Public hearings March - July 2007. Held at Google, Library of Congress and ALA headquarters. Invited 20 presentations speaking as individuals or on behalf of institutions. Draft report issued in November of 2007. Issued for public comment. Reviewed with LC management and presented to LC staff. Presentation was web cast. Report was revised quite substantially. Final report was presented January 2008.
Audience is LOC, others in the bibliographic sphere, policy and decision makers.
3 Guiding Principles:
- Redefine bibliographic control, embraced it all, not just codex based
- Redefine a bibliographic universe, libraries are but one group of players. We need to interact with commercial and other sectors. LOC needs to rely on us as much or more than we rely on them.
- Redefine the LOC in such a way that the Library can determine when it needs to be the sole provider and when it can delegate bibliographic control.
RDA is the successor to AACR2. It's being developed in isolation and in groups.
One recommendation - be less agnostic about cataloging rules. Strong recommendations about getting some user behavior to learn how to best to bibliographic authority work.
Cataloger group at Netflix wants to share their work with us and we certainly want to take advantage of all this work being done but they need tools to do this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
