[DCRM-L] Keeping searchability on old citation forms (was: New citation for "Mortimer, R. French 16th cent." and Mortimer, R. Italian 16th cent.")

[Allison Jai O'Dell]

Erin -- I hate to suggest bibliographic instruction in lieu of better
tools, but starting with the SCF as a reference source does solve your
problem.  :-)

Question:  If you had access to the SCF as a dataset, would your library
use it?  And if so, what format(s) would you prefer?  MARC Authority,
triples, CSV, other?

I've recently suggested that we RDFa-ify the SCF.  We could also do
occasional data dumps.  Short answer: this is very much on my mind.


Allison


On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Erin Blake <EBlake at folger.edu> wrote:

>
> The new citations are great for directing people to the right source if
> they already found the record they want, but researchers accustomed
> searching the 510 for  “VD16 AND 1222” or “STC AND 13828” when they have a
> reference number in hand are going to be troubled by
>
> “Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI.
> Jahrhunderts” and “Pollard, A.W. Short-title catalogue of books printed in
> England, Scotland, & Ireland and of English books printed abroad, 1475-1640
> (2nd ed.)”
>
>
>
> Possible solution: use machine-matching to pair any tricky new 510 with a
> non-displaying-but-searchable local 510 containing the old form by locally
> defining a 2nd indicator.  Most of the new 510s aren’t going to be
> problematic for our users, but there are  a few that are so wildly
> different from what’s commonly seen in dealers’ catalogs that it seems
> worth making a list.
>
>
>
> Anyone else considering something like this?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Erin.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20150428/1665cf9e/attachment.html>