Re: [CODE4LIB] next generation opac mailing list

2006-06-05 Thread Peter Schlumpf
I think this makes perfect sense.   We need this forum.   The catalog is going 
to be with us in one form or another.  One thing that never ceases to amaze me 
is how the library field is sooo quick to throw overboard useful tools just for 
the sake of something different.  The ILS in its present form has LOTS of room 
for improvement but it doesn't mean we have to hide it behind other labels or 
have to turn it into some nebulous concept that doesn't mean anything.

Why do librarians instinctively run away from their purpose?

I've worked all over the place in the library world and I work in a public 
library now.  Here on Mount Olympus we spend so much time arguing pendantically 
about MARC-this and Z39.50-that, and fretting and worrying about what OCLC is 
up to.   All the while our patrons are coming up to the OPAC search stations 
and using the all too limiting user interface we present them to type in the 
one or two keywords that they know in order to find something in the library.  
Do they care about all what we talk about?  No!!!  They just want to find their 
book or resource in whatever form it is in, get it, and go on with their lives.

The catalog is one of the the main interfaces to the library that all patrons 
use.  How can we make that experience most productive?  We need to pay lot of 
attention to that.

Peter Schlumpf

-Original Message-
From: Michael Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Jun 5, 2006 9:04 PM
To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] next generation opac mailing list

I have been reading the comments here and I am in favor of creating a
list for discussing the next generation catalog/information
system/whatever.  I have been to 2 workshops in the last month where I
have heard 2 people from different universities talk about OCLC being
*THE* interface to the library catalog in the future -- truly a
WorldCat.  I consider myself open to new ideas but this one really
worries me.  And when you look at OCLCs long range plans, they want to
become *THE* library interface.

We need something.  My ILS has decided that their next generation
catalog will be a portal with its own database, etc.  I already have one
database with MARC data why do I need another to hold the non-MARC data.
 Why isn't my ILS working to expand/create the next generation MARC
record?  I think the next generation catalog goes hand and hand with the
next generation of MARC.

--
Michael Bowden
Harrisburg Area Community College



 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 6/5/2006 8:17:07 PM 

On Jun 5, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Alexander Johannesen wrote:

 What's wrong with keeping such discussions to this very list? It's
 very on-topic, and I'm not sure I need yet another list (I think I'm
 up to around 30-something now!).


I understand this sentiment. Really!

On the other hand we are a bunch o' hackers, and there is more to
this thing (whatever it is called) than code. We need the perspective
of catalogers, reference types, administrators, vendors, etc. Thus,
the idea for creating a new list.

--
Eric Lease Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame

I'm hiring a Senior Programmer Analyst.
See http://dewey.library.nd.edu/morgan/programmer/.


Re: [CODE4LIB] next generation opac mailing list

2006-06-05 Thread Alexander Johannesen

On 6/6/06, Michael Bowden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

We need something.  My ILS has decided that their next generation
catalog will be a portal with its own database, etc.  I already have one
database with MARC data why do I need another to hold the non-MARC data.
 Why isn't my ILS working to expand/create the next generation MARC
record?  I think the next generation catalog goes hand and hand with the
next generation of MARC.


Oh, this one is easy to answer; we need to get away from MARC. No, not
the content of MARC, nor the idea of it, nor necessarily even the MARC
format and standard itself, but we need to get away from we need
MARC and the idea that knowledge sharing in libraries are best done
through MARC and that Z39.50 must be part of our requirements.

For example, MARC can hold some change control info, but never to the
granulaity that supports for example an NBD which can properly update
records and work on a distributed model. But as soon as we put that
info outside of MARC, the culture will choose to ignore the problem
rather than try to change it. The *culture* of MARC is the problem.

I don't think the OPAC will go away, nor that it absolutely must, but
the very idea of an OPAC is based on knowing what our patrons want;
books that we've cataloged. But all too often we have no idea what
they want; all we've got are assumptions. I think we've come a long
way, but the time to look anew to what purpose the OPAC serves
certainly is ripe.

Ok, I'll stop now. :)


Regards,

Alex
--
Ultimately, all things are known because you want to believe you know.
- Frank Herbert
__ http://shelter.nu/ __