Miksa, Shawne wrote:
Karen wrote: "We have to quit thinking that catalog = library, and start looking at
a wider range of services that we can (and do) provide."
Whoa! Stop!
This would imply that 'we' have all been thinking this--as if we all have tunnel vision.
I don't think that is true at all. Obviously the library as a whole has many components
that all work togehter, the catalog being one of them. But, let's us not equate all
arguments on this listserv as "catalog = library". There is a larger context
in which the library catalog functions.
So let's talk about that larger context. I say this because I think that
the constant comparisons between the catalog and Google ignore the fact
that the catalog is not the library. Let's talk about where the library
fits in to a very large and very active information environment, and how
we can use our bibliographic data to make libraries visible participants
in that environment.
I'll start by saying that as long as we keep our bibliographic data
hidden away in library system databases, we will remain invisible to
most people seeking information on the Web (which is the #1 place where
people seek information today). I think we should stop talking about the
catalog altogether and start talking about how we are going to connect
our data to web searches, web services, and to be easily integrated into
mashups, pipes, etc. Let's quit focusing on the catalog and instead
focus on bibliographic data and its role in this new world.
kc
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
