Comments on: OCLC: the Microsoft of the Library World? http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/ A blog about family, technology, and libraries Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:34:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: <![CDATA[  Responses to OCLC criticism - Family Man Librarian]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-2001 Sun, 10 Jun 2007 04:05:40 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-2001 [...] FRBRizing local library catalog records for free.  I thought I’d repost Carol’s original comment here along with Roy’s reply because I think this dialog deserves more attention and [...] [...] FRBRizing local library catalog records for free.  I thought I’d repost Carol’s original comment here along with Roy’s reply because I think this dialog deserves more attention and [...]

]]> By: <![CDATA[Roy Tennant]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-2000 Wed, 06 Jun 2007 04:24:52 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-2000 "carol o", That is an interesting idea, and one that may be worth pursuing if we can determine what, if anything, you would be able to do with these "FRBRized records" once they were produced for you. One of the problems is that our present integrated library systems (ILS) are mostly not set up to deal with such grouped records. We can't simply hand you a smaller set of records than you gave us, that would be mostly useless. You need to have a system that can take advantage of FRBR relationships. In other words, although you can find out right now which items you have that may be related by using the OCLC xISBN service (see http://worldcat.org/affiliate/webservices/xisbn/app.jsp ), it is really more complicated than that. You may need to have a system that can deal with a grouped display but also allow someone to see the individual items that are part of that group. So although the initial idea is intriguing, I think it requires a bit more thought to be something that we could consider as a service to provide to our members. But I really want to know if this is something you could put to work today in your ILS, so if it is, let me know directly at roy_tennant@oclc.org. Thanks! “carol o”,
That is an interesting idea, and one that may be worth pursuing if we can determine what, if anything, you would be able to do with these “FRBRized records” once they were produced for you. One of the problems is that our present integrated library systems (ILS) are mostly not set up to deal with such grouped records. We can’t simply hand you a smaller set of records than you gave us, that would be mostly useless. You need to have a system that can take advantage of FRBR relationships. In other words, although you can find out right now which items you have that may be related by using the OCLC xISBN service (see http://worldcat.org/affiliate/webservices/xisbn/app.jsp ), it is really more complicated than that. You may need to have a system that can deal with a grouped display but also allow someone to see the individual items that are part of that group. So although the initial idea is intriguing, I think it requires a bit more thought to be something that we could consider as a service to provide to our members. But I really want to know if this is something you could put to work today in your ILS, so if it is, let me know directly at roy_tennant@oclc.org. Thanks!

]]> By: <![CDATA[hangingtogether.org » Blog Archive » Hanging Together]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1999 Sat, 02 Jun 2007 20:39:44 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-1999 [...] Oberg to comment, first directly in response to my post, then in his own blog in a post titled “OCLC: The Microsoft of the Library World?”. In this piece, some of the things he mentions may be legitimate criticisms of the way that OCLC [...] [...] Oberg to comment, first directly in response to my post, then in his own blog in a post titled “OCLC: The Microsoft of the Library World?”. In this piece, some of the things he mentions may be legitimate criticisms of the way that OCLC [...]

]]> By: <![CDATA[Steve]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1998 Wed, 30 May 2007 15:57:47 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-1998 Carol, that's a great idea (OCLC to FRBRize local catalog records)! And yes, I wonder about how or whether the OCLC-dominated workflow for cataloging has been detrimental in some ways. Carol, that’s a great idea (OCLC to FRBRize local catalog records)! And yes, I wonder about how or whether the OCLC-dominated workflow for cataloging has been detrimental in some ways.

]]> By: <![CDATA[carol o]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1997 Wed, 30 May 2007 14:11:20 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-1997 Hi Steve. I completely agree with your assessment. OCLC's is a monopoly, and it's a vendor--and while neither of those labels are inherently "bad," we certainly should not cut the organization any more slack than we cut any other library vendor to whom our libraries are beholden. And yeah it kind of skeeves me that much of OCLC seems to be built on the back of intellectual work done by individual library catalogers, work that OCLC seems eager to leverage to separate ends. There's kind of a half-formed notion in my head that the workflow the OCLC model engenders at many libraries actually has not been good for cataloging as a whole, which of course is a deep irony. One way OCLC could convince me that they're truly a member organization though, with the best interests of libraries at heart, would be to FRBRize all their member libraries' individual library catalogs for free. And I don't mean via WorldCat local, but in analyzing our records per their algorithm and then handing those records back to us to do what we will. After all, the majority of the original bib records were created by individual library catalogers, and our fees certainly helped pay for any R&D. How about it, OCLC? Hi Steve. I completely agree with your assessment. OCLC’s is a monopoly, and it’s a vendor–and while neither of those labels are inherently “bad,” we certainly should not cut the organization any more slack than we cut any other library vendor to whom our libraries are beholden. And yeah it kind of skeeves me that much of OCLC seems to be built on the back of intellectual work done by individual library catalogers, work that OCLC seems eager to leverage to separate ends. There’s kind of a half-formed notion in my head that the workflow the OCLC model engenders at many libraries actually has not been good for cataloging as a whole, which of course is a deep irony.

One way OCLC could convince me that they’re truly a member organization though, with the best interests of libraries at heart, would be to FRBRize all their member libraries’ individual library catalogs for free. And I don’t mean via WorldCat local, but in analyzing our records per their algorithm and then handing those records back to us to do what we will. After all, the majority of the original bib records were created by individual library catalogers, and our fees certainly helped pay for any R&D. How about it, OCLC?

]]> By: <![CDATA[Steve]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1996 Tue, 29 May 2007 22:14:13 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-1996 Sarah, Thanks for your comment, which gives me a bit of encouragement that I wasn't totally out of my mind about this particular post. Steve Sarah,

Thanks for your comment, which gives me a bit of encouragement that I wasn’t totally out of my mind about this particular post.

Steve

]]> By: <![CDATA[Sarah Houghton-Jan (Librarian in Black)]]> http://www.familymanlibrarian.com/2007/05/29/oclc-the-microsoft-of-the-library-world/comment-page-1/#comment-1995 Tue, 29 May 2007 20:26:39 +0000 http://familymanlibrarian.com/?p=610#comment-1995 Yes, absolutely yes, thank you for saying what has been in my head for a long time. OCLC is a member organization. But it is also a monopoly. And, as you say,that is something that should always be questioned. Yes, absolutely yes, thank you for saying what has been in my head for a long time. OCLC is a member organization. But it is also a monopoly. And, as you say,that is something that should always be questioned.

]]>