The presentations from the 2009 Spring Assembly are now posted on the LAUC website:
http://www.ucop.edu/lauc/assembly/
I'm working on getting all the committee reports up as well.
Showing posts with label UCR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UCR. Show all posts
Friday, May 15, 2009
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Discussions with Karen
Question 1:
Undergraduates and consistent results from user groups?
Answer:
They weren't consistent, but they were common. In another section, there were differences among librarians and also commonalities.
Question:
How to incorporate the differences
Answer:
Through focus groups found that well suited to undergrads. More than the undergrad wants and less than what the expert user wants. There's an academic tinge to it. Wanted to emphasize the common. A lot on the delivery v. the discovery. All wanted the digital first. For the physical in nature, wanted abstracts or summaries. Convenience across every group.
Question:
What are some solutions for delivery systems? What solutions do you propose?
Answer: Valerie Horton and writes on a lot of delivery services. Experience of clicking on a link and getting to something. The message is one for libraries and what the user experience is and does it met there expectations.
Question: who does the abstracting for articles in WorldCat.
Answer: mostly from the British Library. Other sources are beyond what OCLC has but it will expose the metadata
Question: the quality control is a serious problem. One librarian gets really bad records and has to work hard to change them. Looking for quality control.
Answer: looking at national library agreements from those like that from the National Library of China (duplication of records are a serious problem). CJK matching algorithm is not great, but the idea is to attract the libraries into the system. They are in conversations with Callus and things look good.
Question: Tell us more about non-Roman cataloging
Answer: Not an expert, but subject-level expertise is growing. Most major growth is occurring outside the United States. Need to be respectful of those other standards in other countries. For subject heading schemes in other countries and languages. Will bring headings into a record and try to match OR will do an authorized duplicate record. Outside the U.S., some countries are adopting Dewey.
Question: have you found that conversations with vendors helped with getting records that would otherwise not be available to OCLC
Answer: Fastest growing segment/division in OCLC is contracts for records (e.g. Springer, Elsevier, etc.). Openly Infomatics was purchased by OCLC to basically help with stuff. [seems like it duplicates the SFX stuff or would want to replace it]
Question: Won't catalogers be less useful.
Answer: Golden opportunity for uncovering hidden collections. Thinks that normalization, etc will free up time to do more that is unique.
Question: Library Thing
Answer: LC promoting FAS approach to cataloging. OCLC has a file of FAS subject heading list and decided to create a FAS headings with authors. Karen mentions a reference to "who will tag" Karen will send the citation to Sam Dunlop.
Undergraduates and consistent results from user groups?
Answer:
They weren't consistent, but they were common. In another section, there were differences among librarians and also commonalities.
Question:
How to incorporate the differences
Answer:
Through focus groups found that well suited to undergrads. More than the undergrad wants and less than what the expert user wants. There's an academic tinge to it. Wanted to emphasize the common. A lot on the delivery v. the discovery. All wanted the digital first. For the physical in nature, wanted abstracts or summaries. Convenience across every group.
Question:
What are some solutions for delivery systems? What solutions do you propose?
Answer: Valerie Horton and writes on a lot of delivery services. Experience of clicking on a link and getting to something. The message is one for libraries and what the user experience is and does it met there expectations.
Question: who does the abstracting for articles in WorldCat.
Answer: mostly from the British Library. Other sources are beyond what OCLC has but it will expose the metadata
Question: the quality control is a serious problem. One librarian gets really bad records and has to work hard to change them. Looking for quality control.
Answer: looking at national library agreements from those like that from the National Library of China (duplication of records are a serious problem). CJK matching algorithm is not great, but the idea is to attract the libraries into the system. They are in conversations with Callus and things look good.
Question: Tell us more about non-Roman cataloging
Answer: Not an expert, but subject-level expertise is growing. Most major growth is occurring outside the United States. Need to be respectful of those other standards in other countries. For subject heading schemes in other countries and languages. Will bring headings into a record and try to match OR will do an authorized duplicate record. Outside the U.S., some countries are adopting Dewey.
Question: have you found that conversations with vendors helped with getting records that would otherwise not be available to OCLC
Answer: Fastest growing segment/division in OCLC is contracts for records (e.g. Springer, Elsevier, etc.). Openly Infomatics was purchased by OCLC to basically help with stuff. [seems like it duplicates the SFX stuff or would want to replace it]
Question: Won't catalogers be less useful.
Answer: Golden opportunity for uncovering hidden collections. Thinks that normalization, etc will free up time to do more that is unique.
Question: Library Thing
Answer: LC promoting FAS approach to cataloging. OCLC has a file of FAS subject heading list and decided to create a FAS headings with authors. Karen mentions a reference to "who will tag" Karen will send the citation to Sam Dunlop.
Breakout sessions with speakers
Patti Martin:
Specific responses to WorldCat Local features:
Michale Athern OCLC - quote that WorldCat interface going away
Librarians - concerned; no other group concerned
Helpful to Amazon review, scholarly
Conference proceedings focus
Customizable interface
Martha Hruska:
Didn't get into details about technical services for non-tech services librarians.
Shared cataloging issues at UCSD
Cataloging monographs in the social sciences, with some electronic resources. Work with non-Roman language original catalogers
Questions about collaborative acquisitions. Discussions with CDC
Collecting in areas where the local campus has language ability or expertise
"Commonly held" collections - materials where languages or subjects are on several campuses
Domestic UC press, Canadian UC press titles
The conversation about collections has been going on for years, but the technology and motivation has changed.
Inventories of campus expertise levels for languages, technical experience
Non-catalogers spending time with catalogers to be work in areas outside of job positions.
Challenges with stakeholders, including people currently doing the work, to promote buy-in with projects. Changes with department culture to look to "larger world view to make changes.
Is attention being paid to other formats, such as online newspapers that may not be archiving themselves?
Survey of Shelf-ready resources on campuses and where costs fall. CDC collaborations of collaborative purchases as groups.
Anectdotal experiences with commercial services (Amazon) for the common needs, with the unusual to be handled by all campuses.
User needs may be overly simplistic - without teaching people about other ways to approach the options or expertise in locating or working with materials.
Scalability of operations to campuses, with Technical Services, Public Services, and administrative functions at campus levels
Calhoun: Recommends sending email to Andrew Pace. Looking at issues of have processes would be addressed in large implementations.
Example: How many circulation transactions if you captured 5% of all circulatiosn worldwide.
Dooley:
Some similar with Hruska and others difference.
Question: Talk about HOTS survey of language and format expertise among catalogers, can the same be used to leverage bibliographers expertise across campuses?
Dooley: Not yet talked about in HOTS but may be of interest.
Question: Is NGTS a smokescreen that campuses are broke and concern about being able to afford.
Dooley: Seeing if there are efficiencies to highlight unique, hidden materials within UC system that are not found elsewhere.
Question: Composition of task groups. Would there be public services, other groups.
Dooley: They will be there but don't have a timeline to be involved.
Observation. Doing surveys of expertise but then to do something with the expertise. methods of cooperation where expertise can be used.
Question: Cooperative approval plans. The whole UC finance climate that makes campus interaction to move money between them in an inhibitor. This needs to be addressed.
Comment: Human factors that will have influence on people and how they do their jobs. People doing the work will need to have their buy-in.
Calhoun:
A theme of other groups - when talking about user needs, you need to use a nuiansed approach.
Different users with different needs.
Referral to the study on user needs - things that were common among the users but also how they differ
Spent time talking about records with non-Roman scripts - Chinese. Loading of records from Taiwan, Hong Kong making a mess in the database. Seeking records with content from East Asia but noting the work within record fields to make the records usable over time.
Intrigued by vast cloud tags in displays in the research display slides.
Diane Bison-Getts (OCLC)
Where do the tags come from, are they more than user submitted tags, or researcher contributed tags.
If a social environment created to allow/encourage people to submit tagging.
Record sets - helping libraries to acquire these data sets
How can WorldCat Local and WorldCat.org point to more electronic resources beyond article metadata. British Library is a huge source of article metadata and FirstSearch. Plans for fiscal year 2010 for metadata for e-resource aggregation. Agreement with Ebsco to expose metadata (not full text) to OCLC.
'Expose your metadata, then more people will use your material."
Talked about subject in all sessions.
What will catalogers do if records are included in collection aggregations? Redeploying labor to enhance hidden collections.
Hidden collections. How can user contributed metadata be verified?
Selling faculty that the metadata is accurate. Will faculty question the metadata?
How much description of collection is enough for special collections? Who should supply the metadata? Is it better undescribed in the value or have something that is incomplete?
Use of Dewey in non-English worldwide. Dewey translated into 32 languages and descriptions. In U.S. seen as a second class structure but in UK, research on using Dewey numbers and captions can be used for non-English collections. Mapping to concepts within other languages, then used to group back to groups with different languages.
Making the materials already cataloged affordable for the world users.
Question: Is placement of Next Generation Melvyl on webpage influence use? How do statistics reflect the placement?
Question: Next Generation Melvyl slower to display holdings, similar to Google interface, breaks the rules of traditional online catalogs by including article records.
Question: NGM users are coming back to NGM. Either the same people are returning or the non-returning users are being replaced with new users.
Comment of web-optimization and clickstream analysis. Study of patterns of clickstreams, where data comes to library sites and then goes. What strikes is there are a lot of click-throughs from Google. Knowing that information for Melvyl that buries details - using Amature (analysis tool) about how the clickstreams are working.
WorldCat.org 80% traffic from other websites - only 12% from original website such as bookmarks or direct links.
Specific responses to WorldCat Local features:
- WCL sets
- facets set by OCLC, let people choose
- Large results sets
- Overall WCL/OCLC database
- Multiple copy requests will not be in initial Request launch
Michale Athern OCLC - quote that WorldCat interface going away
- a gradual development are future
Librarians - concerned; no other group concerned
Helpful to Amazon review, scholarly
Conference proceedings focus
- Limit by publisher
- Design limits
- New name for Melvyl?
Customizable interface
Martha Hruska:
Didn't get into details about technical services for non-tech services librarians.
Shared cataloging issues at UCSD
Cataloging monographs in the social sciences, with some electronic resources. Work with non-Roman language original catalogers
Questions about collaborative acquisitions. Discussions with CDC
Collecting in areas where the local campus has language ability or expertise
"Commonly held" collections - materials where languages or subjects are on several campuses
Domestic UC press, Canadian UC press titles
The conversation about collections has been going on for years, but the technology and motivation has changed.
Inventories of campus expertise levels for languages, technical experience
Non-catalogers spending time with catalogers to be work in areas outside of job positions.
Challenges with stakeholders, including people currently doing the work, to promote buy-in with projects. Changes with department culture to look to "larger world view to make changes.
Is attention being paid to other formats, such as online newspapers that may not be archiving themselves?
Survey of Shelf-ready resources on campuses and where costs fall. CDC collaborations of collaborative purchases as groups.
Anectdotal experiences with commercial services (Amazon) for the common needs, with the unusual to be handled by all campuses.
User needs may be overly simplistic - without teaching people about other ways to approach the options or expertise in locating or working with materials.
Scalability of operations to campuses, with Technical Services, Public Services, and administrative functions at campus levels
Calhoun: Recommends sending email to Andrew Pace. Looking at issues of have processes would be addressed in large implementations.
Example: How many circulation transactions if you captured 5% of all circulatiosn worldwide.
Dooley:
Some similar with Hruska and others difference.
Question: Talk about HOTS survey of language and format expertise among catalogers, can the same be used to leverage bibliographers expertise across campuses?
Dooley: Not yet talked about in HOTS but may be of interest.
Question: Is NGTS a smokescreen that campuses are broke and concern about being able to afford.
Dooley: Seeing if there are efficiencies to highlight unique, hidden materials within UC system that are not found elsewhere.
Question: Composition of task groups. Would there be public services, other groups.
Dooley: They will be there but don't have a timeline to be involved.
Observation. Doing surveys of expertise but then to do something with the expertise. methods of cooperation where expertise can be used.
Question: Cooperative approval plans. The whole UC finance climate that makes campus interaction to move money between them in an inhibitor. This needs to be addressed.
Comment: Human factors that will have influence on people and how they do their jobs. People doing the work will need to have their buy-in.
Calhoun:
A theme of other groups - when talking about user needs, you need to use a nuiansed approach.
Different users with different needs.
Referral to the study on user needs - things that were common among the users but also how they differ
Spent time talking about records with non-Roman scripts - Chinese. Loading of records from Taiwan, Hong Kong making a mess in the database. Seeking records with content from East Asia but noting the work within record fields to make the records usable over time.
Intrigued by vast cloud tags in displays in the research display slides.
Diane Bison-Getts (OCLC)
Where do the tags come from, are they more than user submitted tags, or researcher contributed tags.
If a social environment created to allow/encourage people to submit tagging.
Record sets - helping libraries to acquire these data sets
How can WorldCat Local and WorldCat.org point to more electronic resources beyond article metadata. British Library is a huge source of article metadata and FirstSearch. Plans for fiscal year 2010 for metadata for e-resource aggregation. Agreement with Ebsco to expose metadata (not full text) to OCLC.
'Expose your metadata, then more people will use your material."
Talked about subject in all sessions.
What will catalogers do if records are included in collection aggregations? Redeploying labor to enhance hidden collections.
Hidden collections. How can user contributed metadata be verified?
Selling faculty that the metadata is accurate. Will faculty question the metadata?
How much description of collection is enough for special collections? Who should supply the metadata? Is it better undescribed in the value or have something that is incomplete?
Use of Dewey in non-English worldwide. Dewey translated into 32 languages and descriptions. In U.S. seen as a second class structure but in UK, research on using Dewey numbers and captions can be used for non-English collections. Mapping to concepts within other languages, then used to group back to groups with different languages.
Making the materials already cataloged affordable for the world users.
Question: Is placement of Next Generation Melvyl on webpage influence use? How do statistics reflect the placement?
Question: Next Generation Melvyl slower to display holdings, similar to Google interface, breaks the rules of traditional online catalogs by including article records.
Question: NGM users are coming back to NGM. Either the same people are returning or the non-returning users are being replaced with new users.
Comment of web-optimization and clickstream analysis. Study of patterns of clickstreams, where data comes to library sites and then goes. What strikes is there are a lot of click-throughs from Google. Knowing that information for Melvyl that buries details - using Amature (analysis tool) about how the clickstreams are working.
WorldCat.org 80% traffic from other websites - only 12% from original website such as bookmarks or direct links.
Martha Hruska on Next Generation Technical Services
This is becoming mostly a reflection on our successes and our failures from that taskforce report called the BSTF Report of 2005 at libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final.pdf . Check out all of these acronyms:
Undoubtedly you know most of these.
The issues covered here are clearly some of the big picture type.
Next Generation Technical Services (NGTS) Charge that hopes to move to the network level and take advantage of collaboration among the UC. Also interested in low-hanging fruit of UCs.
Interesting that she leaves some of the needs up to bibliographers when I think that they have less and less time to contribute to these broader issues. Or is that really the case? Hm.
The difficulty Martha and most others have either pointed out or ignored is still one of whether there are enough people with interest or sufficient expertise to provide assistance in technical (metadata/cataloging/tagging/?) areas outside libraries. Do others with skill care enough to work on things that are not clearly of value to them right now?
Says that workflow models are not really great or discovered yet for various types of grey materials (e.g. scholarly websites).
The proposed models, funding and organizational structures are the more critical aspects of changes of this sort.
The other critical half is clearly the evaluative aspect. Martha has some ideas about how this works.
Martha refers to shared collecting and stuff like UCM being the repository for Springer books (those purchased online I presume).
libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts
- BSTF (2005 Bibliographic Services Task Force Report)
- CAMCIG (Cataloging and Metadata Common Interest Group)
- UC CONSER (UC CONSER Funnel Program)
- CDL (California Digital Library)
- HOTS (Heads of Technical Services)
- HOTS SCP (Shared Cataloging Program Advisory Committee (SCP AC))
- JSTOR (JSTOR - short for Journal Storage)
- IEEE (Institution of Electrical and Electronic Engineers)
- CDC (Collection Development Committee)
- ACG (All Campus Group)
- ACIG (Acquisitions Common Interest Group)
- PAG (Preservation Advisory Group)
- PCC (Program for Cooperative Cataloging)
- HOSC (Heads of Special Collections)
- NGTS (Next Generation Technical Services)
Undoubtedly you know most of these.
The issues covered here are clearly some of the big picture type.
Next Generation Technical Services (NGTS) Charge that hopes to move to the network level and take advantage of collaboration among the UC. Also interested in low-hanging fruit of UCs.
Interesting that she leaves some of the needs up to bibliographers when I think that they have less and less time to contribute to these broader issues. Or is that really the case? Hm.
The difficulty Martha and most others have either pointed out or ignored is still one of whether there are enough people with interest or sufficient expertise to provide assistance in technical (metadata/cataloging/tagging/?) areas outside libraries. Do others with skill care enough to work on things that are not clearly of value to them right now?
Says that workflow models are not really great or discovered yet for various types of grey materials (e.g. scholarly websites).
The proposed models, funding and organizational structures are the more critical aspects of changes of this sort.
The other critical half is clearly the evaluative aspect. Martha has some ideas about how this works.
Martha refers to shared collecting and stuff like UCM being the repository for Springer books (those purchased online I presume).
libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts
Martha Hruska - Nex Gen Technical Services
Martha Hruska, Chair of the UC Next Generation Technical Services Steering team and member of the NGTS Executive Team, AUL Collections Services, UC San Diego
NGTS Context
BSTF report 2005: next steps
UC related inititatives over the last four years
Catalysts for Change
NGTS Charge
BSTF Report 2005
Develop a framework for the next three to five years for NGTS for the Uc Libraries. the steering team will:
HOTS survey - How many campuses use shelf-ready services from vendors
Rationale
Relationship between users, libraries, publsihers, vendors in search, discovery, and retrieval
Information Resource Types
Each task group to develop 1-3 models for each information resource group
Each model must
Web site http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts/
The website is now active - at least they have the name, more details will follow.
Proposed models vetted
Explore workflow, policies
Phase 1 - May - Sept. 2009
UC Merced taking on responsibility for shared print holdings for Springer E-Books package
Less copies but sharable across system
NGTS Context
BSTF report 2005: next steps
UC related inititatives over the last four years
Catalysts for Change
NGTS Charge
BSTF Report 2005
- Looking at workflow and practices within infrastructure.
- Adopting New Cataloging Practices
- Supporting Continuous Improvement
- Rearchitecting cataloging workflow
- Appropriate metadata scheme
- manually enrich metadata in imprtant areas
- Automate Metadata Creation
- CAMCIG Reports
- UC CONSER Funnel
- CDL/HOTS agreement to fund temporary SCP Chinese cataloger
- SCP Scope Statement review
- HOTS Cataloging Expertise Spreadsheet
- Shared print Projects CDL/CDC
- Journals (licensed journals, JSTOR, IEEE)
- Canadiana
- CDC Prospective Shared Print Monographic task force
- LC Final Report of the Working Group on the future of Bibliographic Control
- NG Melvyl
- Requires harmonization of UC cataloging policies and process revisions
- Requres cooperative approaches to acquisitiosns approaches
- Mass Digitization
- Hathi Trust
- Web archiving
- Expose Hidden Collections
- Mange the life-cycle or born digital and other emerging formats
- UC-wide and campus financial pressures
Develop a framework for the next three to five years for NGTS for the Uc Libraries. the steering team will:
- address the broad transformative changes that will move technical services to the network level and that will reap the benefits of collaborative technical services
- identitfy areas of coordination and collaboration among the UC Libraries techncial services operations
- quickly implement identified 'low-hanging furuit" changes 9with approval from the executive Team)
HOTS survey - How many campuses use shelf-ready services from vendors
Rationale
- Both user expectation and financial realities to maximize efficiency and effectiveness of processes
- NGTS
- Position UC libraires to support NGM and address "backend" recommendatons to BSTF report
- Speed processing throughout technical services function
- View all aspects to technical services as s system-wide, single enterprise
- Start with existing metadata that is 'good enough" from all available resources
- All for continuous improvement to "good enough: including from the world beyond UC Libraries: expert communities, vendors, other libraries
- TS provide infrastructure for library collections
- TS services provide broad access to and facilitate discovery of library collections
Relationship between users, libraries, publsihers, vendors in search, discovery, and retrieval
Information Resource Types
- Commonly Held Content in Roman script
- Commonly held Content in Non-Roman Script
- UC Unique Collections
- 21st Century Emerging Resources
Each task group to develop 1-3 models for each information resource group
Each model must
- Address process for selection
Web site http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/uls/ngts/
The website is now active - at least they have the name, more details will follow.
Proposed models vetted
Explore workflow, policies
Phase 1 - May - Sept. 2009
- Best practices and current initiatives within UC and beyond
- Outline proposed models
- Analyze proposed models
- Redefine, break down silos in TS functions
- Collaborative approval plans
- Collaborative outsourcing and other vendor services
- Improved tools for system-wide acquisitions and cataloging
- 'Shared Print in Place' becomes norm rather than exception
- less redundant work -> campus focus on local priorities
UC Merced taking on responsibility for shared print holdings for Springer E-Books package
Less copies but sharable across system
Questions to Martin
Question: There was an announcement that the pilot would be expanding with a July roll-out date. Can you talk about this?
Martin: July rollout date pulled back.
Question: If pilot extended and Melvyl phased out, is WorldCat Local really a pilot?
Martin: If pilot is accepted, steps for decommissioning Melvyl.
Martin: July rollout date pulled back.
Question: If pilot extended and Melvyl phased out, is WorldCat Local really a pilot?
Martin: If pilot is accepted, steps for decommissioning Melvyl.
Martin - Where are we at with the WCL pilot
Melvyl usage still outpaces use of WorldCat Local (combined)
There is still enough interest in WCL and Melvyl to use and return.
What has happened since May 2008?
Usability studies
Log analysis
1/4 searches generate more that 500 results
~10% of searches produce zero results
Relationship building
Learning to describe UC culture to OCLC and learning to talk to each other
What is the Pilot?
Enhanced discovery functionality
Enhanced delivery resources
Fully integrate Request functionality
In progress
LHRS will make response time faster
Timetable
Information
University of California
There is still enough interest in WCL and Melvyl to use and return.
What has happened since May 2008?
Usability studies
Log analysis
1/4 searches generate more that 500 results
~10% of searches produce zero results
Relationship building
Learning to describe UC culture to OCLC and learning to talk to each other
What is the Pilot?
- Look and feel is similar to University of Washington version
- Ten campus specific views and one UC-wide view
- not able to ingrate with multiple campus OPACS
- Interface usability
- Interoperability with ILSs
- Seamless interoperability with UC-eLinks and Request
- the ability to lead, access and display non-traditional records
- Digital assets, journals, mass digitization
Enhanced discovery functionality
Enhanced delivery resources
Fully integrate Request functionality
In progress
- OCLC working hard on fully integrating Request functionality
- Need to accommodate RLFs, campuses with more than one ILS
- Speed!
- Coding, local holdings records (LHRs)
LHRS will make response time faster
- Summary
- Holdings
- Digital assets
- Currently testing LHRs at UCLA, UCD, UCI
- Voyager, Aleph, III
- Plan to automate weekly synch with OCLC
Timetable
- Currently in pilot
- Pilot extended until all outstanding requirements are met by OCLC
- Melvyl not going away just yet; planned phase out
- Look for communication about ramping up this Fall
Information
University of California
Patti Martin, CDL Directory of Bibliographic Services
BTSF task Force recommendation
Goals and Strategies
Why pilot with OCLC
Call to Action: The university of California Bibliographic Services Task Force Report, December 2005
http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final.pdf
Overarching recommendations
Focus on what users what
Users expect to cover a wide information universe
Enriched metadata, i.e. TOCs, cover art
Aside: Ubiquitous Librarian - hired recently at UCSB
A survey of undergraduates revealed they would not look at a review without cover art
Full text availablle
Next Generation Discovery/Delivery Strategies
1. Provide strategies geared toward end usrs
2. Define colelction in new ways
3. Embed collections and services where users are
4. Meet user needs and solve user problems, over and over again
For librarians who want more control over search, use OCLC FirstSearch for expert users; WCL focused on undergraduates
People may start with Google but return to catalogs
API: Google Book Search, Quickstart, SCOPUS
40 or more present return more than 500 results
Use author or keyword searching
1. Provide Strategies geared Toward End Users
navigae and managemlarge retreival sets
Intutitive interface, nort simple searching
Wring meaximum value from metadata
Recognize different use cases: broad overivew, in-depth scholary
2. Define Collection in New Ways
* Collections - selected materials that can be accessed in a reasonable period in time
* Distinction beteeen print and digital collections is blurring
* Significance of local ownership is changing
* Unique special collections more boradly available
MELVYL includes more that ten UC campus, with other affiliated libraries?
Does it make sense to have non-UC affiliated libraries in NG Melvyl?
BSTF committee and HOPS to bring to UL meeting about affiliated and non-UC libraries in NGM
Materials available in other libraries; changes in local collections
Special Collections on campus are becoming more widely known
3. Embed Services Where Users Are
Ubiquitous Librarian recommending WCL following Twitter feeds of authors: what they are thinking, what they are doing.
Just at beginning of working in cloud computing and sharing. On the front step of the frontier.
Invited to contribute ideas and listened to from both sides.
Goals and Strategies
Why pilot with OCLC
Call to Action: The university of California Bibliographic Services Task Force Report, December 2005
http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final.pdf
Overarching recommendations
Focus on what users what
- Worldwide pool of information
- Search simplicity
- Immediate satisfaction/delivery
- Quality results
- Web 2.0 tools
Users expect to cover a wide information universe
Enriched metadata, i.e. TOCs, cover art
Aside: Ubiquitous Librarian - hired recently at UCSB
A survey of undergraduates revealed they would not look at a review without cover art
Full text availablle
Next Generation Discovery/Delivery Strategies
1. Provide strategies geared toward end usrs
2. Define colelction in new ways
3. Embed collections and services where users are
4. Meet user needs and solve user problems, over and over again
For librarians who want more control over search, use OCLC FirstSearch for expert users; WCL focused on undergraduates
People may start with Google but return to catalogs
API: Google Book Search, Quickstart, SCOPUS
40 or more present return more than 500 results
Use author or keyword searching
1. Provide Strategies geared Toward End Users
navigae and managemlarge retreival sets
Intutitive interface, nort simple searching
Wring meaximum value from metadata
Recognize different use cases: broad overivew, in-depth scholary
2. Define Collection in New Ways
* Collections - selected materials that can be accessed in a reasonable period in time
* Distinction beteeen print and digital collections is blurring
* Significance of local ownership is changing
* Unique special collections more boradly available
MELVYL includes more that ten UC campus, with other affiliated libraries?
Does it make sense to have non-UC affiliated libraries in NG Melvyl?
BSTF committee and HOPS to bring to UL meeting about affiliated and non-UC libraries in NGM
Materials available in other libraries; changes in local collections
Special Collections on campus are becoming more widely known
3. Embed Services Where Users Are
- Service and collection packages that live in learning environments, Web sites, desktops, other applications
- Focus on adding value in the target environment
- let users re-package and re-use
- Our close and easy access to faculty and students is enormous untapped asset
- find creative ways to really study user needs
Ubiquitous Librarian recommending WCL following Twitter feeds of authors: what they are thinking, what they are doing.
- Look for points of pain, problems, unmet needs
- Know when to teach and when to listen, when to lead and when to follow
- Do it, try it, assess it, change it quickly if needed.
Just at beginning of working in cloud computing and sharing. On the front step of the frontier.
- Consider how to aggregate for service in the virtual world
- by campus organization
- by academic status 9undergrad, faculty, grad)
- by discipline
- by use (quick answer, broad overview, in depth research)
- by individual
- Consider library staff as another class
- Provide access to global resources as well as campus and ssytemwide resoruces
- Size of database (over 140 Million records, growing at rate of over 10 Million per year - grew over 40 M in 2009)
- Integration of mass digitization output
- Integration of digital assets
- integration of journal article metadata and full text
- similar vision/goals/interests
- opportunity to partner/contribute to research agenda
- leverage investment with peer institutions
Invited to contribute ideas and listened to from both sides.
Questions from the audience
Louise Ratliff: Who are the users?
Calhoun: Users included in the report.
Undergraduates, faculty, expert users, community groups in report.
Librarians: in different roles and locations
Undergraduates more open to user contributed reviews. Faculty preferred authoritative authors to write reviews.
Sally Weimer: What software for the Integrated Library System be loaded?
Calhoun: Software would reside on the network and would not require maintenance on the local sites.
Calhoun: Users included in the report.
Undergraduates, faculty, expert users, community groups in report.
Librarians: in different roles and locations
Undergraduates more open to user contributed reviews. Faculty preferred authoritative authors to write reviews.
Sally Weimer: What software for the Integrated Library System be loaded?
Calhoun: Software would reside on the network and would not require maintenance on the local sites.
Calhoun - In Conclusion
1. Take collections to a wider audience: be where their eyes are; expose your metadata!
2. Open up metadata silos; support metatdata exchange, reuse, and management
3. Develop user-centered definitions of metadata 'quality'; engage with users as metadata contributors
4. Move metadata management to the cloud.
2. Open up metadata silos; support metatdata exchange, reuse, and management
3. Develop user-centered definitions of metadata 'quality'; engage with users as metadata contributors
4. Move metadata management to the cloud.
5. Moving "Into the Cloud"
Moving on to the Grid
YouTube video: What is cloud computing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?y-6PNuQHUiV3q
Web 2.0 Expo with Tim O'Reilly (10 minutes)
How Might OCLC help?
Harness cooperative by enabling libraries to share hardware, services, and data 'in the cloud'
WorldCat Local as a network-level end-user interface
OCLC Cooperative Web-scale Library management Services
OCLC Quick Start services
Web-scale
Interview with Andrew Pace (OCLC) in Library Journal
OCLC’s Andrew Pace Talks with Talis about Web-Scale ILS
Andrew Pace Talks with Talis [00:50:08m]
"To find out about OCLC’s move in to providing hosted, Web-scale, Software as a Service functionality for managing libraries, who better to ask than the person responsible for the programme."
Moving Tech Services to the Cloud: What Would We Need to do Differently?
Incrementally move technical services to the network
Think of selection-ordering
YouTube video: What is cloud computing?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?y-6PNuQHUiV3q
Web 2.0 Expo with Tim O'Reilly (10 minutes)
How Might OCLC help?
Harness cooperative by enabling libraries to share hardware, services, and data 'in the cloud'
WorldCat Local as a network-level end-user interface
OCLC Cooperative Web-scale Library management Services
OCLC Quick Start services
Web-scale
- Circulation and Delivery
- Print and Electronic Acquisitions
- License management
- Self-configuration (configure workflows for the site)
Interview with Andrew Pace (OCLC) in Library Journal
OCLC’s Andrew Pace Talks with Talis about Web-Scale ILS
Andrew Pace Talks with Talis [00:50:08m]
"To find out about OCLC’s move in to providing hosted, Web-scale, Software as a Service functionality for managing libraries, who better to ask than the person responsible for the programme."
Moving Tech Services to the Cloud: What Would We Need to do Differently?
Incrementally move technical services to the network
Think of selection-ordering
Opening metadata Silos
Metadata Communities for:
Text
images
Sound Video
Multimedia
Objects
more
New Models for Creating and Sharing metadata
Crosswalks between data formats
Ingests publisher and vendor metadata in ONIX
Crosswalk to MARC
Enhance publisher metadata
Output MARC records
Output enhanced ONIX format
http://www.oclc.org/partnerships/material/nexgen/nextgencataloging.htm
FY09 objective; Launch Next Generation Cataloging
Working to have process in place by end of OCLC fiscal year 2009
Text
- licensed
- Archival
images
Sound Video
Multimedia
Objects
more
New Models for Creating and Sharing metadata
Crosswalks between data formats
- mapping between technologies
- Shared authority works
Ingests publisher and vendor metadata in ONIX
Crosswalk to MARC
Enhance publisher metadata
Output MARC records
Output enhanced ONIX format
http://www.oclc.org/partnerships/material/nexgen/nextgencataloging.htm
FY09 objective; Launch Next Generation Cataloging
Working to have process in place by end of OCLC fiscal year 2009
OCLC FRBR Work-Set Algorithm
Provides a FRBR-based view of the data
Definition: FRBR - Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records
Summary snapshot of work sets used by OCLC Research
Share data elements across a FRBR work set
Work The Novel
Expression The Text
Manifestations Summary Cover Art Subject Terms
Summaries and Table of Contents ranked high is user expectations.
Assembling a bunch of resources from several locations at the time of view.
Relationship - bibliographic, subject headings, holdings
Amazon includes user purchasing histories for further groupings
Definition: FRBR - Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records
Summary snapshot of work sets used by OCLC Research
- FRBR work set count
- Cover art
- Summary/abstract
- Table of Contents
- Total work sets
- Single record sets
- Multi-records sets
Share data elements across a FRBR work set
Work The Novel
Expression The Text
Manifestations Summary Cover Art Subject Terms
Summaries and Table of Contents ranked high is user expectations.
Assembling a bunch of resources from several locations at the time of view.
Relationship - bibliographic, subject headings, holdings
Amazon includes user purchasing histories for further groupings
Multithreaded, mashed-up, Assembled, from Various Sources..
Multithreaded, Mashed-up, Assembled, from Various Sources, Dynamic/Changing, Social
Could move away from single format record
SoundUnWound
Ex. Bob Dylan
Remixes data from IMDb. Amazon's music catalog, MusicBrainz, Mechanical Turk, more. 'Views' by artist, album, genre, more. Links out to excerpts, content, other sites. Entries are editable by the community of users.
Moving in the direct of FRBR/RDA
Could move away from single format record
SoundUnWound
Ex. Bob Dylan
Remixes data from IMDb. Amazon's music catalog, MusicBrainz, Mechanical Turk, more. 'Views' by artist, album, genre, more. Links out to excerpts, content, other sites. Entries are editable by the community of users.
Moving in the direct of FRBR/RDA
OCLC's Expert Community Experiment
Experiment in "social cataloging" with OCLC expert community - began Feb.15
Interest and motivation from WorldCat Local pilot sites that what WCL as their "database of record"
- allows member libraries with full-level Cataloging authors to make additions and changes to almost all fields in almost all records
End user Engagement: John MacColl's "Are Archives the New Libraries?" (PDF)
OCLC EMEA Dutch Customer Contact Day (The Hague, Netherlands)
Do not describe everything in painstaking detail
Detail: January 16, 2008: LC photographs on Flickr
LC found the user comments helpful in identifying details of photographs.
Interest and motivation from WorldCat Local pilot sites that what WCL as their "database of record"
- allows member libraries with full-level Cataloging authors to make additions and changes to almost all fields in almost all records
End user Engagement: John MacColl's "Are Archives the New Libraries?" (PDF)
OCLC EMEA Dutch Customer Contact Day (The Hague, Netherlands)
- "I'm John MacColl, and I was in The Dutch National Archives last month with Karen Calhoun, where we were both speaking at the Dutch Customer Contact Day, which OCLC EMEA runs each year for their many Dutch customers. Following Karen's presentation, I gave a presentation whose tongue-in-cheek title was inspired by the organisation hosting the meeting - Are archives the new libraries? It also reflects our growing interest in helping research libraries digitize their unique and rare materials - archives as well as rare books and manuscripts - and to put these materials onto the web as a priority. Are archives the new libraries? was therefore a teasing title, suggesting that much of the business of archives is now coming to the fore for research library managers. Source"
Do not describe everything in painstaking detail
- Start with basic description, then ...
- Allow serious researchers to contact you for more detail, and ...
- ... engage your user community with adding to the descriptions.
Detail: January 16, 2008: LC photographs on Flickr
- Library of Congress photographs on Flickr: The Commons
- Within 24 hours later
- 650k view
- 392 views on photostream
- 492 with user comments
LC found the user comments helpful in identifying details of photographs.
Three "S"s of Sharing
- Synchronization
- Syndication
- Sharing
2. User Driven
"Quality" in the use workflow from discovery to delivery
"How does what end users say they want relate to what catalogers want?"
Report: Online Catalogs: What Users and Librarians Want 9downloaded two thousand times within first few hours of posting)
http://worldcat.org/oclc/311870930
Available as PDF or print version ($10)
http://www.oclc.org/us/en/reports/onlinecatalogs/default.html
3. Social
Blurring of the lines between metadata or content consumers and creators (e.g. SoundUnwound, Wikipedia, more)
- Expert community
- End user community
Calhoun - What does "Next Gen" Mean to Me?
Aspects of cataloging and metadata environment
1. Coordinated global, collective and local metadata management
Reliable local effort at the regional and global environment
The same data with many different views of the data
Data Sharing, Syndication, Synchronization, linking
Outward integration, exposure, and linking of collections (e.g. Google Books, WorldCat, other aggregators, national library consortia)
(back and forth between services)
"Metadata Switch"
Data needs to be located on many different places on the web. "globally coordinated system"
Calhoun - What is not Next Gen?
Redundancy
Collecting, storing materials in separate locations (libraries)
But the Internet allow for new ways to explore possibilities
Slide from CNI Project Briefing, Slide 35 (2008)
http://www.cni.org.tfms/2008a.spring/abstracts/PB-worldcat-jordan.html
Collecting, storing materials in separate locations (libraries)
But the Internet allow for new ways to explore possibilities
Slide from CNI Project Briefing, Slide 35 (2008)
http://www.cni.org.tfms/2008a.spring/abstracts/PB-worldcat-jordan.html
Presentation: next Generation Library Collections Management
Karen Calhoun, OCLC
Vice President, WorldCat and Metadata Services
Presentation document will be posted to LAUC website and blog.
Talk about phrase "Next Generation"
Getting tired of the phrase? Audience: Yes
As a fashionable term, we need to redefine what it means for things "over there"
Robert Young OCLC survey at user meetings at OCLC Western
"What Does 'next Generation Cataloging' Mean?"
Ten mentioned NG cataloging responses
A long tail toward the end, "a lot of pieces but not a collected whole"
Calhoun: a 'cloudy idea' of the notion of NG in our cataloging environment
What is not NG? Redundancy in library operations: collections and cataloging services
Vice President, WorldCat and Metadata Services
Presentation document will be posted to LAUC website and blog.
Talk about phrase "Next Generation"
Getting tired of the phrase? Audience: Yes
As a fashionable term, we need to redefine what it means for things "over there"
Robert Young OCLC survey at user meetings at OCLC Western
"What Does 'next Generation Cataloging' Mean?"
Ten mentioned NG cataloging responses
- FRBR/work sets
- RDA
- simpler/easier tools
- Lots of e-resources
- Authorities, thesauri
- Web-like linking, etc.
- User-supplied data
- More automation
- Subject analysts+
- Special collections
A long tail toward the end, "a lot of pieces but not a collected whole"
Calhoun: a 'cloudy idea' of the notion of NG in our cataloging environment
What is not NG? Redundancy in library operations: collections and cataloging services
Next Generation Library Services Panel - Karen and Patti
Karen Calhoun, VP of OCLC
Martha Hruska, Chair of the UC Next Generation Technical Services Steering Tem
Patti Martin, Chair of the UC Next Generation Melvyl Steering Team and member of the NGM Exec Team.
Karen tries to clarify what Next Generation means in this context and infers that it becomes dates. Still wants to consider it as new and exciting. References Robert Young at OCLC Western spring 2009) user meetings (citation hidden by chairs from my view). Looks at the survey results from technical services people. Talks about the things that technical services practitioners wanted such. Karen wants to talk about what it is not, i.e. redundancy in collections and in services. References to Jordan, Bill and Pozenel, Mindy. 2008. Presented as a CNI Project Briefing. Slide 35. Karen talks about how once OCLC records downloaded, they are not re-uploaded once corrected, so there is a duplication of effort that should not occur. Karen puts up a visual inverted triangle that has global at the top, group in th middle, and local at the point. On the left side is: Data sharing, syndication, synchronication, linking. On the Right side: outward integration, exposure, and linking of collections (e.g. Googl books, WorldCate, Other aggregatiors, nationa libriries, consortial) with a back and forth two arrows with Local/group authantication, discovers and delivery services. All of this comes under the heading of Coordinated global, collective, and local metadat managment. The clear implication to me is that OCLC wants to be our ILS. Yet, Karen's next slide has the header "metadata swithch": Click 3 Times and You're Back in Kansas (er, UC Riverside). The idea is that you start anywhere and you end up at your library. I'm not sure how or why you would need to choose this over Google Scholar and SFX (i.e. UC-eLinks). There is also the issue to me of marc records not covered
Synchronization
Syndication
Sharing
Looking at the synchronization issues.
Next covering the user driven part of OCLC.
Reference to www.worldcat.org/oclc/311870930. This one looks at what librarians and users want.
Karen doesn't want to talk about the qualities of this report now. Not sure what she's telling us that is new.
Now talking about how the catalog is social. The "Blurring of the lines between metadat or content consumers and careators (e.g.SoundUnwound; Expert community; End user community
Looking at OCLC Expert Community Experiment
Began Feb 15
Interest and motivation from those that want to use WC as cat of record.
End User Engagement: With Thanks to John MacColl's "Are Archives . . ."
Advising that should not describe everything in detail. Start with basic description
Looks at Library of Congress experiment with images available via Flickr. Notes that the new tags were useful as well as the comments. OCLC was able to find out more about each of these topics.
Multithreaded, mashed-=up, assembled from Various Sources, Dynamic/Changing, Social. That is to say that it opens up the possibility to creat editable entries by a community of users. [There's a lot of reference to what users _might_ do to help. What does that mean for those object that people don't do anything about?]. Karen uses the example of "Bob Dylan" in SoundUnwound. This is seen as a way to implement FRBR.
OCLC FRBR Work-Set Algoritghm.
Provides a FRBR-based view of the data
Recods clustered into works using author and title fields from bibliographic records, etc. [lots of data listed lots here]
Audience as what FRBR means to a public services person. Shows example of Blade Runner in which you have a faceted tag-cloud representation. The next example was "In defense of food : an eater's manifesto". This example uses the related works section.
Karen conceives of this as opening up metadata silos.
The slides for Karen's presentation will be on SlideShare, so I'll try to do my of my thoughts.
The irony of Karen's metaphor of using our own generators v. using an electric grid is not lost on me considering how we want to move in a slighty difference direction with power (e.g. using solar cells and wind power to generate our own power).
If Karen sees the advantage of OCLC as a sharing tool to get cloud computing going, what does that really mean.
This issue concentrates on how an invisible community can do what individuals can't and how a community can do it more cheaply and more efficiently. Yet, she later puts library employees back into the picture in the next slide. So, holding out the promise of "free stuff", the discussion turns to what we do, which costs money. This is confusing because it promises something for everyone and is open to odd interpretation. I'm sure I'm not quite getting this right, so I'll have to clarify my thoughts later. I'm also not sure, of those who were asked about it, how many of those who would view content would add to it or supplement it.
Patti Martin
Starting back to BSTF recommendations (this was gone over in another assembly). This report from 2005 is still being looked at. Reminds us that users wanted worldwide pool of information, simplicity, immediate satisfaction/delivery, quality results, web 2.0 tools. I'm not sure that we done better. Confused how content delivery has been made easier (some UC-eLinks go to text, some don't. Sometimes you have to go to menus, if you know what a menu might contain. Sometimes you have to just keep clicking.). Know, from working at reference, that tools like WorldCat local that look like they are wide and deep and aren't do a lot of harm and only add opaque complexities. Has not touched on issue of records purchased by universities that we cannot share by contract agreement. Talking about why we went with OCLC. Size is the major reason (more than 140 million with 60 million from non-US libraries in the queue). I've noticed that both Holly Tomren and I are trying to Twitter this. Check #LAUC as a search. Showing the chart of Melvyl v. NGM noting that the pilot sees plenty of usage despite lack of promotion (I would dispute that based on UCI's front door, Front door real estate=promotion and other studies have shown increases in such an instance). Patti notes that OCLC and UC have had to try and be very specific and detailed because we, as an organization, have very different cultures and ways of communicating. I don't think that many of the changes being discussed regarding unique branding, etc for WorldCat will be all that great if the past is any indication. Let's find out. Patti is promising local holdings (LHRs) and is testing with Aleph, Innovative, and Voyager at three campuses. Timetable pilot is extended until our needs are met. In this economic climate, I wonder who pays for the NGM pilot when it doesn't meet its goals?
Find more at libraries.universityofcalifornia/......... Suggests subscribing to Ellen Meltzer's list (UC Users Council).
Martha Hruska, Chair of the UC Next Generation Technical Services Steering Tem
Patti Martin, Chair of the UC Next Generation Melvyl Steering Team and member of the NGM Exec Team.
Karen tries to clarify what Next Generation means in this context and infers that it becomes dates. Still wants to consider it as new and exciting. References Robert Young at OCLC Western spring 2009) user meetings (citation hidden by chairs from my view). Looks at the survey results from technical services people. Talks about the things that technical services practitioners wanted such. Karen wants to talk about what it is not, i.e. redundancy in collections and in services. References to Jordan, Bill and Pozenel, Mindy. 2008. Presented as a CNI Project Briefing. Slide 35. Karen talks about how once OCLC records downloaded, they are not re-uploaded once corrected, so there is a duplication of effort that should not occur. Karen puts up a visual inverted triangle that has global at the top, group in th middle, and local at the point. On the left side is: Data sharing, syndication, synchronication, linking. On the Right side: outward integration, exposure, and linking of collections (e.g. Googl books, WorldCate, Other aggregatiors, nationa libriries, consortial) with a back and forth two arrows with Local/group authantication, discovers and delivery services. All of this comes under the heading of Coordinated global, collective, and local metadat managment. The clear implication to me is that OCLC wants to be our ILS. Yet, Karen's next slide has the header "metadata swithch": Click 3 Times and You're Back in Kansas (er, UC Riverside). The idea is that you start anywhere and you end up at your library. I'm not sure how or why you would need to choose this over Google Scholar and SFX (i.e. UC-eLinks). There is also the issue to me of marc records not covered
Synchronization
Syndication
Sharing
Looking at the synchronization issues.
Next covering the user driven part of OCLC.
Reference to www.worldcat.org/oclc/311870930. This one looks at what librarians and users want.
Karen doesn't want to talk about the qualities of this report now. Not sure what she's telling us that is new.
Now talking about how the catalog is social. The "Blurring of the lines between metadat or content consumers and careators (e.g.SoundUnwound; Expert community; End user community
Looking at OCLC Expert Community Experiment
Began Feb 15
Interest and motivation from those that want to use WC as cat of record.
End User Engagement: With Thanks to John MacColl's "Are Archives . . ."
Advising that should not describe everything in detail. Start with basic description
Looks at Library of Congress experiment with images available via Flickr. Notes that the new tags were useful as well as the comments. OCLC was able to find out more about each of these topics.
Multithreaded, mashed-=up, assembled from Various Sources, Dynamic/Changing, Social. That is to say that it opens up the possibility to creat editable entries by a community of users. [There's a lot of reference to what users _might_ do to help. What does that mean for those object that people don't do anything about?]. Karen uses the example of "Bob Dylan" in SoundUnwound. This is seen as a way to implement FRBR.
OCLC FRBR Work-Set Algoritghm.
Provides a FRBR-based view of the data
Recods clustered into works using author and title fields from bibliographic records, etc. [lots of data listed lots here]
Audience as what FRBR means to a public services person. Shows example of Blade Runner in which you have a faceted tag-cloud representation. The next example was "In defense of food : an eater's manifesto". This example uses the related works section.
Karen conceives of this as opening up metadata silos.
The slides for Karen's presentation will be on SlideShare, so I'll try to do my of my thoughts.
The irony of Karen's metaphor of using our own generators v. using an electric grid is not lost on me considering how we want to move in a slighty difference direction with power (e.g. using solar cells and wind power to generate our own power).
If Karen sees the advantage of OCLC as a sharing tool to get cloud computing going, what does that really mean.
This issue concentrates on how an invisible community can do what individuals can't and how a community can do it more cheaply and more efficiently. Yet, she later puts library employees back into the picture in the next slide. So, holding out the promise of "free stuff", the discussion turns to what we do, which costs money. This is confusing because it promises something for everyone and is open to odd interpretation. I'm sure I'm not quite getting this right, so I'll have to clarify my thoughts later. I'm also not sure, of those who were asked about it, how many of those who would view content would add to it or supplement it.
Patti Martin
Starting back to BSTF recommendations (this was gone over in another assembly). This report from 2005 is still being looked at. Reminds us that users wanted worldwide pool of information, simplicity, immediate satisfaction/delivery, quality results, web 2.0 tools. I'm not sure that we done better. Confused how content delivery has been made easier (some UC-eLinks go to text, some don't. Sometimes you have to go to menus, if you know what a menu might contain. Sometimes you have to just keep clicking.). Know, from working at reference, that tools like WorldCat local that look like they are wide and deep and aren't do a lot of harm and only add opaque complexities. Has not touched on issue of records purchased by universities that we cannot share by contract agreement. Talking about why we went with OCLC. Size is the major reason (more than 140 million with 60 million from non-US libraries in the queue). I've noticed that both Holly Tomren and I are trying to Twitter this. Check #LAUC as a search. Showing the chart of Melvyl v. NGM noting that the pilot sees plenty of usage despite lack of promotion (I would dispute that based on UCI's front door, Front door real estate=promotion and other studies have shown increases in such an instance). Patti notes that OCLC and UC have had to try and be very specific and detailed because we, as an organization, have very different cultures and ways of communicating. I don't think that many of the changes being discussed regarding unique branding, etc for WorldCat will be all that great if the past is any indication. Let's find out. Patti is promising local holdings (LHRs) and is testing with Aleph, Innovative, and Voyager at three campuses. Timetable pilot is extended until our needs are met. In this economic climate, I wonder who pays for the NGM pilot when it doesn't meet its goals?
Find more at libraries.universityofcalifornia/......... Suggests subscribing to Ellen Meltzer's list (UC Users Council).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
