Hal Cain wrote:
<snip>
The dictum that context imparts meaning is, I think, relevant here.   
In the context of an ISBD bibliographic record, printed or in a screen  
display, standard abbreviations have a context; nowadays, even so,  
possibly not all who see them in that context will understand them.

In contemporary bibliographic displays, the context is often  
fractured.  Therefore the meaning may be obscured.

When we prepare to dismantle bibliographic data and mash elements into  
hitherto unseen combinations, we can assume no particular context,   
Therefore it seems to me that abbreviations no longer have a place in  
our workflows.
</snip>

This is a very important point, but I have a different take on it. In the 
future, I think it is safe to assume that the catalog records we make will be 
mashed up with other "things" out there to create entirely new resources. (At 
least, I hope they will be because otherwise, our records will be ignored and 
not used at all) At this point in time, it is practically impossible to predict 
how our records will be used and changed, but one thing that I think we can 
assume: the traditional context will be lost, as Hal mentioned. This means that 
a bibliographic record will be seen *outside* the catalog, in isolation from 
the rest of the records it relates to, by way of headings and descriptive 
treatments. It will be just like looking at a few catalog cards taken out of a 
catalog. There are so many relationships that the headings and descriptions 
make little or no sense. (To explain this, someone can ask of a single record: 
"Why did you use the form "International Business Machines Corporation and not 
IBM, which is the way everybody thinks of it?" "Because the other records in 
the catalog use that same form." etc.)

In the future, a record will also be seen from within different 
cultural/linguistic contexts. So, when a patron sees a record imported into a 
future mashup, it may be coming from--who knows where, e.g. (I hope these links 
work) http://tinyurl.com/68jaybd from the Deutsche National Bibliothek, where 
the abbreviation for pages is S. or from the Russian State Library, where the 
abbreviation is http://tinyurl.com/6ccpjwq c. but there are all kinds of other 
abbreviations, too in all of these records. So, while the Russian abbreviations 
may be incomprehensible to English speakers, the reverse is true as well.

This is what our patrons will see and will be experiencing in the near 
future--I am sure that many are experiencing this right now--and we must 
respond. All of these library/catalog records will--sooner or later--be mashed 
up. Of that I have no doubt because people want it so desperately. [Concerning 
this, I suggest the recent report from CIBER "Social Media and Research 
Workflow." 
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostudies/research/ciber/social-media-report.pdf, p. 29 
where it is clear that above all, *everybody* wants from libraries a single 
search for all electronically licensed resources. I think we need to do more 
than that and include non-licensed resources, and that is what I have attempted 
to do with my Extend Search in my catalog at AUR]

For our patrons, the universe of information has gone *far outside* the 
boundaries of our catalogs, and we must continually look at the information 
universe through the eyes *of our patrons*, and focus less on the information 
universe *of library catalogs*, which sadly, is having less and less meaning 
and importance to the world. This involves a total change in the intellectual 
orientation of catalogers, it's true, but it is vital that we do it. It has 
been compared by others to the intellectual changes people went through when 
the Earth "ceased" to be the center of the universe, and the Sun "became" the 
center of one small solar system inside an average galaxy within an immense, 
almost unlimited universe.

How do/will our records fit in to such a universe? Does typing out 
abbreviations even play a role in it? How can we "fix" the situation for our 
patrons when they can see so many types of records created under so many rules 
and many times--if not most of the time, no rules at all? 

These are some of the genuine, and serious, issues that our patrons are facing, 
and by extension, we should face as well.

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