Erin Blake wrote:
<snip>
For my own research, and for many users I serve professionally (in an 
independent research library), it is vital to have both transcribed and 
normalized information for primary resources. I can find things published in 
London, England, through MARC 752 ‡a Great Britain ‡b England ‡d London. I can 
find engravings published by John Bowles through 700 ‡a Bowles, John, ‡d 
1701-1779, ‡e publisher; but through 260‡b I can see that there are two 
distinct versions of the plate, each with a varying address for Bowles' firm. 
</snip>

This is great that you can do those things, but when we get into the larger 
world of metadata, there are problems with the reliability of the result. For 
example, you can search for 752$d for place of publication, going down to the 
city, plus the publisher through a 700$e search, and that is fine. But these 
types of access points are not on every record in every library. So, this works 
within the confines of the (magnificent!) Folger collection, but it ceases to 
function, or at least functions differently, the moment the searcher steps 
outside the single catalog, i.e. it may function for some other records in some 
other catalogs, but even then, it is so hit or miss that for anyone except the 
genuine expert who knows the variations in all the different cataloging 
practices, the existence of this information, or lack of it, must be considered 
random. 

I have only seen a few of these records, but for example, the "Early American 
Imprints" series includes the 752, but it appears that when the author is also 
the printer, there is not a separate 700$e made for the author as publisher, 
e.g. in Princeton's catalog we can see where James Parker is added as a printer 
in only one of these books he printed, apparently because he authored one of 
them. 
http://catalog.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=CMT9208TS&Search_Code=GKEY^&CNT=50&HIST=1
 vs. 
http://catalog.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?Search_Arg=006430461&Search_Code=GKEY^&CNT=50&HIST=1.
 Therefore, if there were a separate search for "printers" limited to 700$e, 
when you searched for Parker, you would retrieve only one of these.

When this is translated into the world of union catalogs, the task is for the 
users to know what is really happening when they search a 752 field, or when 
they do a search for a "printer", and this becomes even more complex. For 
instance, see this Worldcat record which has Parker's name only in the 
publication information without a 752 or 700 of any kind with his heading: 
http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/30550049. Naturally, this method is not used for 
(most) modern imprints.

By pointing this out, I am not finding fault with anything at all, just trying 
to emphasize the amount of knowledge assumed when someone would search, e.g. 
for someone as a printer: not only do they need to know about the history of 
the man or woman as printer, but also how all these different catalogs deal 
with this kind of information, and how each library's treatment is 
mashed/blended/wrung through union catalogs such as WorldCat. If researchers do 
not understand such intricacies, they could believe they are doing far more 
than they actually are when they do a search for James Parker as printer, or 
when they search for printers in Woodbridge, New Jersey; by definition, they 
are only getting subsets of the whole. 

This is a fact, and it is important for searchers to realize it. This is what I 
mean by the reliability of the result. When it comes to matters of general 
intellectual input (authors, editors, translators to a lesser degree), there is 
a lot more standardization, but in other areas such as what you mention, there 
are special, local practices.

Today, I think it is becoming more and more important to always assume that our 
users do not understand this sort of complexity. And they won't ask questions. 
So, what can we do in this new environment to help users get some level of 
awareness of such problems and how to deal with them? I think there are many 
ways that the catalog can provide help, but we need to think in entirely new 
ways. 

And let's not even contemplate what will happen when Google Books enters the 
fray!

James Weinheimer  j.weinhei...@aur.edu
Director of Library and Information Services
The American University of Rome
via Pietro Roselli, 4
00153 Rome, Italy
voice- 011 39 06 58330919 ext. 258
fax-011 39 06 58330992
First Thus: http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
Cooperative Cataloging Rules: http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/

Reply via email to