<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">"Fool me once ..."--Elizabeth O'Keefe has put <i>very</i> succinctly what I was composing in my head when notice came that a new posting had arrived.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">More extensively: The OCLC business model will always seek the minimum of data that is usually sufficient to distinguish manifestations, with a bias towards errors of conflation in cases of doubt. We, on the other hand, know that distinctions of manifestation based on seemingly minor data (fingerprints, perhaps?) may prove, in individual cases, significant, and in aggregate a more accurate representation of the complexity of the phenomena that our work accounts for. Even within the scope of a manifestation one may note a feature that is not item-level, and perhaps worth recording (e.g. OCLC #1687316). This has nothing to do with truly item-level information in the construction of a catalog, as historically important as that may be in itself.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:small">OCLC will always have the power to sell itself over our heads, so to speak, and in that context our concerns sink without a trace. Alison has been addressing the question as one with a <i>much</i> longer future in this game than I have (as I hope for both our sakes), so the question will be: Can a boutique version of the database be developed out of reach of 900-pound gorillas--"boutique" I write, because that how the gorillas will see it.</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><font face="'courier new', monospace">RICHARD NOBLE :: RARE MATERIALS CATALOGUER :: JOHN HAY LIBRARY</font><div><font face="'courier new', monospace">BROWN UNIVERSITY :: PROVIDENCE, R.I. 02912 :: 401-863-1187</font></div><div><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><</span><a href="mailto:RICHARD_NOBLE@BROWN.EDU" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace" target="_blank">Richard_Noble@Br</a><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><a href="http://own.edu" target="_blank">own.edu</a></span><span style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">></span></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Elizabeth O'Keefe <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eokeefe@themorgan.org" target="_blank">eokeefe@themorgan.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>It would seem to be a case of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice ..."<br><br></div>Liz O'Keefe<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="h5"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Lapka, Francis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:francis.lapka@yale.edu" target="_blank">francis.lapka@yale.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">There is a timely and closely related posting by Karen Smith-Yoshimura (of OCLC research):<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><a href="http://hangingtogether.org/?p=5091" target="_blank">http://hangingtogether.org/?p=5091</a><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">See especially the sections on “Sharing data in centralized and distributed models” and “Importance of provenance,” which discuss the idea of using OCLC data as
the <i>database of record</i> for local catalogs. <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">The idea of such a dependency on OCLC for special collections metadata makes me uncomfortable. I’d be happier looking to resources such as (an improved) ESTC as
databases of record, even if this option presents greater challenges for development and sustainability.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">Francis<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> [</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ted P Gemberling<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 27, 2015 1:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] We need a schema for that (was: Discontinuation of OCLC's institutional records program)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Francis,
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">I would be pretty nervous about trying to create our own database, independent of OCLC. Unless we are in a position to buy all of OCLC’s records on old books
and then revise all of them. I think Allison’s idea of linking the annotations on Bibframe to “appropriate” OCLC records is more realistic. I realize that means we would still have to wade through all the duplicate records to find “appropriate” ones. But after
all, that’s what we’ve been doing for quite awhile. And since there are a limited number of new editions of pre-1801 books yet to be cataloged, this problem should diminish over time. Admittedly there are still lots of non-English-language records being added,
but I generally ignore those unless all the English records are particularly poor, in my effort to figure out how to describe a book.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Ted Gemberling
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> [</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Lapka, Francis<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 27, 2015 8:55 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [DCRM-L] We need a schema for that (was: Discontinuation of OCLC's institutional records program)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">I partially agree with your suggestion, Allison (the big picture bit); but linking to OCLC for edition (Manifestation) descriptions would be less than ideal (see
my previous message).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">If</span></i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"> BIBFRAME succeeds in becoming the standard for the representation of
library data on the web, then RBMS should work to develop the schema it needs within the BIBFRAME framework. Although the current BIBFRAME model represents copy-specific descriptions as Annotations, it’s my impression that they are reconsidering this decision;
that is, they may revise the model to recognize Items (/Holdings) as a proper resource. See:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><a href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.loc.gov_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FA2-3Dind1501-26L-3Dbibframe-26T-3D0-26P-3D13353&d=AwMGaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=t7GDkvcZa922K6iya7a6MxgVxxw7OjL0m1rPBXkflk4&m=Q3oaXUaHkwFGbSWtKg0LXXjqMWZrH8HuorCA_7T0UQU&s=grTf_ijjP4W3UvUKyk9G0v3ZzGop0zabNC9SMN4YhRk&e=" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif"">http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind1501&L=bibframe&T=0&P=13353</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">Yes, we should definitely push for a schema (in BIBFRAME, or elsewhere if need be) with data elements that precisely match the copy-specific information our community
uses. I’d be happy to contribute to such work.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d">Francis<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Georgia","serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">
</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> [</span><a href="mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">mailto:dcrm-l-bounces@lib.byu.edu</span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Allison Jai O'Dell<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 25, 2015 3:08 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> DCRM Revision Group List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [DCRM-L] We need a schema for that (was: Discontinuation of OCLC's institutional records program)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I hesitate to send this out to the DCRM list, but since we're on the subject... <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The IR thread has surfaced a well-known problem: that rare materials users need better access to detailed and copy-specific information -- and they need it from an aggregated, Web-based portal, not through everybody's individual catalogs.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I do not think that we, the DCRM community, need to rely on OCLC or WorldCat to achieve this end. At a 2014 Bib Standards meeting, I suggested an alternate solution: <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">RBMS should develop a schema for the copy-specific and detailed information that rare materials libraries aim to capture. Descriptions in this new format could be linked to BIBFRAME resources as an Annotation, and linked to OCLC records
for the appropriate edition. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Once we have structured data, we can develop the cross-institutional datastores and access means that our users need. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thoughts? Volunteers? The IR thread has re-invigorated my interest in this idea, and I'd like to push forward.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best,<br>
Allison<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br></div></div>-- <br><div><div dir="ltr">Elizabeth O'Keefe<br>Director of Collection Information Systems<br>The Morgan Library & Museum<br>225 Madison Avenue<br>New York, NY 10016-3405<br> <br>TEL: <a href="tel:212%20590-0380" value="+12125900380" target="_blank">212 590-0380</a><br>FAX: <a href="tel:2127685680" value="+12127685680" target="_blank">2127685680</a><br>NET: <a href="mailto:eokeefe@themorgan.org" target="_blank">eokeefe@themorgan.org</a><br><br>Visit CORSAIR, the Library's comprehensive collections catalog:<br><a href="http://corsair.themorgan.org" target="_blank">http://corsair.themorgan.org</a><br></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>