Diane I. Hillmann wrote:
[I'd love to
see some analysis of the real extent of shared data, including an analysis of contributions to OCLC--and especially those records that have been "bumped" by LC records, the assumption being that LC's are always better! That's a wonderful example of built-in disincentives to increased metadata creation outside LC, by the way.]
Diane, during the last open meeting, Lorcan Dempsey read a few figures from a statistical report of OCLC's. I don't remember the details, but it was about the number of holdings attached to LoC records v. non-LoC, and his point was that LoC records are favored heavily. The WorldCat site lists LoC as 12% of the contributed records, 86% "participant" and 2% "participant-entered LC". (Anyone know what that latter is?) Perhaps we could ask Lorcan for the location of that report. It may not answer your "bumped" question, but that's worth asking about. As for name authorities, you list a combined 332,640 for NACO. The LoC stats (based on what they say about the 2008 subscription) is a total of 450,000 records, of which 250,000 new. So the figures are not so far apart between LoC and NACO. kc -- ----------------------------------- Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kcoyle.net ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet fx.: 510-848-3913 mo.: 510-435-8234 ------------------------------------
