Re: [CODE4LIB] Super Bowl

[Michael B. Klein]

Yep! Jessie Keck and I discussed getting together to watch; this thread is
as good a place as any to decide where! :-)

My flight gets in around 11am.

Michael

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Patrick Berry  wrote:

> I'll be flying in Sunday around noon. Is anybody is interested in finding
> a pub near the hotel to catch the game?
>
> Via mobile keyboard
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] code4lib 2012 Newcomer Dinner, Tuesday 2/7

[Mark A. Matienzo]

Newcomers, veterans, etc. -

Not to be outdone by the gentleman from Penn State, Hillel Arnold and
I have made reservations for Sitka & Spruce
 for 6 at 8:15 PM. It's also 0.8 miles
from the conference hotel.

Sitka & Spruce is consistently lauded for its simple, highly-local and
highly-seasonal cuisine. Four slots are left, and we'd love for you to
join us. Before dinner we can kill time at Bar Ferd'nand
 which is both a wine shop and a bar with
snacks and fancy non-alcoholic things.

-mm


On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Michael J. Giarlo
 wrote:
> Dear newcomers and fellow veterans,
>
> I have made a reservation at Tom Douglas's Palace Kitchen (0.8mi from
> hotel) for 6 at 8pm. This place is fabulous.  I'd encourage you to
> sign up while slots are left, assuming you can stomach my company, or
> make plans to visit at least one of Tom's places while you're in
> Seattle.
>
> -Mike
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 09:24, Becky Yoose  wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> Are you coming to c4l this year? Will this be your first time at the
>> conference? Or are you a c4l veteran looking to corrupt some newbies? Come
>> one, come all to the Newcomer Dinner on *Tuesday, February 7th*. Join
>> fellow c4l newbies and veterans for an evening of food, socializing, and
>> stimulating demonstrations of the many uses of XML.
>>
>> The sign up page is at
>> http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_c4l2012_social_activities#Newcomer_dinner.
>> There are a lot of restaurants to choose from, so there should be plenty of
>> options to go around. Here are the guidelines (also listed on the wiki):
>>
>>   - Max of 6 per location
>>      - Please, no waitlisting :(
>>      - Some places are large enough to accommodate multiple groups - it's
>>      your responsibility to find out either way if you're interested
>>      - ID yourselves so we can get a good mix of new people and veterans
>>   in each group
>>      - New folks - n
>>      - c4l vets - v
>>   - One leader needed for each location (declare yourself! - Vets are
>>   highly encouraged to lead the group :))
>>      - Leader duties
>>         - Make reservations if required; otherwise make sure that the
>>         restaurant can handle a group of 6 rowdy library coders
>>         - Herd folks from hotel/other designated meeting place to
>>         restaurant (know where you're going)
>>
>> Go forth and sign up! Let me know if you have any questions and I'll see
>> you all soon.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Becky

Re: [CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Michael J. Giarlo]

Thanks, Jennifer!  I've added this information to the wiki.

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 19:01, Jennifer Ward  wrote:
> I can think of three good bottleshops (all w/ taps in case you want a 
> growler) that are located on bus lines from downtown:
>
> Bottleworks (http://bottleworksbeerstore.blogspot.com/): Probably the shop I 
> frequent the most. Take the 16 to Wallingford.
>
> Last Drop (http://www.lastdropbeershop.com/): Take the 71,72, or 73 north 
> from downtown and get off at 80th.
>
> Beer Authority (http://www.seattlebeerauthority.com/): probably the quickest 
> trip from downtown on the 522. get off at the 125th St stop in Lake City and 
> walk north a couple of blocks.
>
> Lots of other pub/beer places noted on the map: http://g.co/maps/4m5pk
>
> --Jennifer
>
> On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Mark A. Matienzo wrote:
>
>> It appears some industrious souls added a "Local Beer Places" section
>> to the c4l12 Social Activities wiki page:
>> http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_c4l2012_social_activities#Local_Beer_Places
>>
>> -mm
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michael J. Giarlo
>>  wrote:
>>> Perhaps some of the locals can recommend local beer stores for those
>>> who want to avoid checking bags, but still want to contribute.  For
>>> those people rumored to be attending such a drink-up, of course.
>>>
>>> -Mike
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 16:33, Mark A. Matienzo  wrote:
 Correction:

 The Get Lamp showing preferences seem to be on Tuesday or Wednesday at
 9 PM. I'm happy to go with either although there's been one request
 for Tuesday at 9 PM already.

 -mm

Re: [CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Jennifer Ward]

I can think of three good bottleshops (all w/ taps in case you want a growler) 
that are located on bus lines from downtown:

Bottleworks (http://bottleworksbeerstore.blogspot.com/): Probably the shop I 
frequent the most. Take the 16 to Wallingford. 

Last Drop (http://www.lastdropbeershop.com/): Take the 71,72, or 73 north from 
downtown and get off at 80th. 

Beer Authority (http://www.seattlebeerauthority.com/): probably the quickest 
trip from downtown on the 522. get off at the 125th St stop in Lake City and 
walk north a couple of blocks. 

Lots of other pub/beer places noted on the map: http://g.co/maps/4m5pk

--Jennifer

On Jan 29, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Mark A. Matienzo wrote:

> It appears some industrious souls added a "Local Beer Places" section
> to the c4l12 Social Activities wiki page:
> http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_c4l2012_social_activities#Local_Beer_Places
> 
> -mm
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michael J. Giarlo
>  wrote:
>> Perhaps some of the locals can recommend local beer stores for those
>> who want to avoid checking bags, but still want to contribute.  For
>> those people rumored to be attending such a drink-up, of course.
>> 
>> -Mike
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 16:33, Mark A. Matienzo  wrote:
>>> Correction:
>>> 
>>> The Get Lamp showing preferences seem to be on Tuesday or Wednesday at
>>> 9 PM. I'm happy to go with either although there's been one request
>>> for Tuesday at 9 PM already.
>>> 
>>> -mm

Re: [CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Mark A. Matienzo]

It appears some industrious souls added a "Local Beer Places" section
to the c4l12 Social Activities wiki page:
http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_c4l2012_social_activities#Local_Beer_Places

-mm


On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michael J. Giarlo
 wrote:
> Perhaps some of the locals can recommend local beer stores for those
> who want to avoid checking bags, but still want to contribute.  For
> those people rumored to be attending such a drink-up, of course.
>
> -Mike
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 16:33, Mark A. Matienzo  wrote:
>> Correction:
>>
>> The Get Lamp showing preferences seem to be on Tuesday or Wednesday at
>> 9 PM. I'm happy to go with either although there's been one request
>> for Tuesday at 9 PM already.
>>
>> -mm

[CODE4LIB] Super Bowl

[Patrick Berry]

I'll be flying in Sunday around noon. Is anybody is interested in finding a pub 
near the hotel to catch the game?

Via mobile keyboard

Re: [CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Michael J. Giarlo]

Perhaps some of the locals can recommend local beer stores for those
who want to avoid checking bags, but still want to contribute.  For
those people rumored to be attending such a drink-up, of course.

-Mike


On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 16:33, Mark A. Matienzo  wrote:
> Correction:
>
> The Get Lamp showing preferences seem to be on Tuesday or Wednesday at
> 9 PM. I'm happy to go with either although there's been one request
> for Tuesday at 9 PM already.
>
> -mm

Re: [CODE4LIB] code4lib 2012 Newcomer Dinner, Tuesday 2/7

[Michael J. Giarlo]

Dear newcomers and fellow veterans,

I have made a reservation at Tom Douglas's Palace Kitchen (0.8mi from
hotel) for 6 at 8pm. This place is fabulous.  I'd encourage you to
sign up while slots are left, assuming you can stomach my company, or
make plans to visit at least one of Tom's places while you're in
Seattle.

-Mike


On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 09:24, Becky Yoose  wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Are you coming to c4l this year? Will this be your first time at the
> conference? Or are you a c4l veteran looking to corrupt some newbies? Come
> one, come all to the Newcomer Dinner on *Tuesday, February 7th*. Join
> fellow c4l newbies and veterans for an evening of food, socializing, and
> stimulating demonstrations of the many uses of XML.
>
> The sign up page is at
> http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_c4l2012_social_activities#Newcomer_dinner.
> There are a lot of restaurants to choose from, so there should be plenty of
> options to go around. Here are the guidelines (also listed on the wiki):
>
>   - Max of 6 per location
>      - Please, no waitlisting :(
>      - Some places are large enough to accommodate multiple groups - it's
>      your responsibility to find out either way if you're interested
>      - ID yourselves so we can get a good mix of new people and veterans
>   in each group
>      - New folks - n
>      - c4l vets - v
>   - One leader needed for each location (declare yourself! - Vets are
>   highly encouraged to lead the group :))
>      - Leader duties
>         - Make reservations if required; otherwise make sure that the
>         restaurant can handle a group of 6 rowdy library coders
>         - Herd folks from hotel/other designated meeting place to
>         restaurant (know where you're going)
>
> Go forth and sign up! Let me know if you have any questions and I'll see
> you all soon.
>
> Thanks,
> Becky

Re: [CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Mark A. Matienzo]

Correction:

The Get Lamp showing preferences seem to be on Tuesday or Wednesday at
9 PM. I'm happy to go with either although there's been one request
for Tuesday at 9 PM already.

-mm

[CODE4LIB] Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012

[Mark A. Matienzo]

Do you like really good beer and/or would you possibly be willing to
bring some in your luggage to Seattle?

Rumor has it that a few conference attendees are self-organizing a
Craft Brew Drinkup at Code4lib 2012. The general idea is that people
bring beer that they love or at least think other people should try.
Interested parties will find a time to sit and taste everyone's
selections - likely either Monday or Wednesday night given the fact
that the timing of the "GET LAMP" showing seems to be settling on
Tuesday evening.

I hear that you don't have to bring beer to attend or participate, but
it certainly helps to ensure that the Drinkup has enough to go around.
If you're a homebrewer, I have been told that you are welcome to bring
your own if you think it will pass muster.

There is  a signup sheet on the wiki - please post there with your
name, location, ideas of what you might bring, and potential requests
for others.

http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/2012_Craft_Brew_Drinkup

Mark

Re: [CODE4LIB] Metadata war stories...

[Stephen Meyer]

David, sorry my message was unclear and I should have given the example 
for this particular case. My objection is not over the need to add more 
complex conditional logic to the MARC holdings parsing code. The 
exception to the rule is, after all, documented.


What I take issue with is the fact that the ambiguity does not provide 
enough guidance or incentive for the cataloger to ensure consistent 
data. Because we have opened the possibility that in some cases it is 
legitimate to put chronological data in enumeration subfields I am 
encountering cases in which it is far less clear that the shift should 
have taken place.


This is a caption/pattern and data combination that I have encountered:

  854 00 $8 1 $a (year) $b no. $o (suppl.)
  864 40 $8 1.1 $a 1996 $b 6-12

What someone has done here is shifted the chronological data (year) into 
the subfield for "Highest level of enumeration" even when there is 
enumeration data (no.). So why has this happened? Is someone trying to 
say that the year data is enumeration because this publisher uses the 
year for its highest level of enumeration? If so, it is ambiguous 
whether that is the intent or this is a case of the subfield shifting 
and therefore extremely hard to detect with code. Is the cataloger just 
used to putting numbered (as opposed to Volume) enumeration in subfield 
$b and it just felt wrong to put the "no." in subfield $a as the highest 
level? I get that on some level because I would expect the cataloging to 
produce habit forming patterns of workflow. We are after all trying to 
impose order upon this data.


In the end, when there is this ambiguity, I suspect people are 
experimenting with their data input and stopping when the data looks 
reasonable in the current OPAC display. Not all of our cataloging is 
done by trained catalogers. Not all of it is even done by librarians who 
have once had a cataloging class, maybe decades ago. Some of our 
holdings cataloging is done by student staff who have no vested interest 
in the long term state of the data.


So I then ask myself what incentive could the designers of this MARC 
holdings spec possibly have for encouraging the subfield shift? Is it 
just that it is always desirable to have *something* in subfield $a? If 
that is the case then enumeration and chronology should not be sharing 
the same MARC fields.


Presently, I have only tackled the parsing issue fully for visual 
display, but there are other significant areas where this ambiguity is 
more problematic. Say I want to match my holdings against my consortium, 
HathiTrust, OCLC or Google Books? That is a case where holdings 
statements need to be exploded from summary ranges (e.g., volumes 1-50, 
59-100) into individually enumerated volumes and numbers (etc.). If I 
can't trust the semantics of the metadata standard, that is a very hard 
thing to do.


-Steve

David Fiander wrote, On 1/28/12 11:22 AM:

Stephen, regarding the question of ambiguity about chronology vs
enumeration, this is what I did with my parser:

# If items are identified by chronology only, with no separate
# enumeration (eg, a newspaper issue), then the chronology is
# recorded in the enumeration subfields $a - $f.  We can tell
# that this is the case if there are $a - $f subfields and no
# chronology subfields ($i-$k), and none of the $a-$f subfields
# have associated $u or $v subfields, but there's a $w and no $x

So, if there are ONLY enumeration fields, and none of the enumeration
fields have corresponding frequency or continuity indicators, AND there's a
publication frequency but no indication of when in the calendar the highest
level of enumeration changes, THEN the enumerations are really chronology.

Of course, this will still get certain patterns wrong, but it's the best
one can do.


On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 11:37, Stephen Meyerwrote:


War is hell, right? Lately we have been dealing with a particular
combination of two circles of the metadata Inferno: the first (limbo) and
sixth (heresy):

The limbo I'll define as a poorly designed metadata spec: the MARC
holdings standard. The poor design in question is the ambiguity of
enumeration/chronology subfield assignment, specifically this rule:

  When only chronology is used on an item (that is, the item
  carries no enumeration), the chronology is contained in the
  relevant enumeration subfield ($a-$h) instead of the chronology
  subfields ($i-$m).
  
http://www.loc.gov/marc/**holdings/hd863865.html

This means that as a programmer trying to parse enumeration and chronology
data from our holdings data *that uses a standard* I cannot reliably know
that a subfield which has been defined as containing "First level of
enumeration" will in fact contain enumeration rather than chronology.
What's a programmer to do? Limbo, limbo.

Others in this thread have already described the common heresy involved in
MARC cataloging: embedding data in a record intended for a si