> -----Original Message----- > From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description > and Access [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Bernhard Eversberg > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 12:10 PM > To: RDA-L@INFOSERV.NLC-BNC.CA > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Library of Congress response to LCWG > > Jim Weinheimer wrote: > > > > This is really the point: relatively few people start their > research with a library catalog. In fact, I was surprised > when OCLC discovered that an entire 1%-11% does today! If > people are not using library catalogs to start with, it > logically follows that the #1 search choice for people is full-text. > > > > But do we know what people did before the advent of internet > search technologies? Did everybody at once rush to a library > catalog? Or are those that do, in absolute numbers, even more > numerous today than > 15 years ago? I guess the phone was used a lot more to gain > information, for one thing, and whatever reference books > people had at home. And if they went to a library, didn't > most of them make a beeline for the shelves and went browsing > before they turned to reference and then, finally, to the > card catalog? I'm afraid we have no figures. > Our reading rooms are fuller than they were 15 years ago and > book checkouts have not dropped. The use of catalogs from > outside, and then placing reserves from home or office (the > "obtain" function), is something that didn't exist 15 years > ago. But how many searches there are that might benefit from > FRBR is unknown.
How do we explain the huge number of searches done every day on the web (in 2006 213 million according to Search Engine Watch http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=2156461). Do these people represent the unsatisfied customers before the web? People are using the internet for non-library functions today, such as to watch videos--but it sounds as if our users come to the library today to do the same thing. There is a lot of data for library use from pre-internet days, but it counts things such as circulation, or physical bodies in the library, and it is very difficult to compare this data with the data we can get today. It's great that your reading rooms are doing well and book checkouts are steady. It's just that in pre-internet days, we had pretty much a captive audience. If somebody wanted information, they could come to our libraries, use their old Britannica or Funk & Wagnell's, or do without. Once they came to a library, they could use the card catalog, ask a reference librarian, or flounder around helplessly and just browse the shelves. Many preferred to flounder around and just browse the shelves. The way I see it is: the moment our users had a real choice, they jumped at it. One of the trends today is to eliminate the reference desk, and have reference librarians (who are going through just as profound changes as anyone else) work virtually or walk around the library. I guess that I am concerned that the statement "Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful," may well end up correct and will be far more correct than anything libraries do. Too bad we have to play catch-up! James Weinheimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director of Library and Information Services The American University of Rome via Pietro Roselli, 4 00153 Rome, Italy voice- 011 39 06 58330919 ext. 327 fax-011 39 06 58330992
