Jean Pajarek explores OCLC’s WorldCat Works— its available set of linked data. Like Pajarek, I’m wondering how we can get this linked data to align more with Group 1 FRBR entities:
Looking at the example, one sees a set of, well, links. The links are separated into a number of categories, many of which will be familiar to catalogers (e.g., contributor, creator, genre). The links can be viewed as several different kinds of RDF serializations, in addition to HTML: Turtle, RDF/XML, N-Triples, and JSON-LD.
While recognizing the significance of what OCLC has done, I confess to some confusion. The “work” chosen as an example is actually what RDA calls an “expression.” Gandhi’s “work” in the example is a translation of his autobiography, which was originally written in Gujarati, yet this is nowhere apparent in the sample “work” description. The original Gujarati work has its own work description (http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/1809067428.html); as far as I can tell, it includes no link to the English translation. Is it unrealistic to expect linked data to provide links between works and their translations?
To be fair, I’d love to see a skilled Web programmer pull the information from those links into a comprehensive layout— that would be very exciting! But I also am concerned that confusion will result from the use of “work”for what looks like “expression”.
Fee, W. (2013). Where Is the Justice… League?: Graphic Novel Cataloging and Classification. Serials Review, 39(1), 37-46.
A great resource. Does anyone know of a more updated available version?
I found an 1870 article on library classification that predates Dewey and Library of Congress. Then I wrote about it.
Most librarians have faced awkward small talk with folks from outside the profession: the half-hearted Dewey joke, the semi-earnest request for us to explain why libraries aren’t rendered obsolete by internet search, and so on. Imagine if this classification scheme had won out over Dewey’s…can you imagine having to explain Francis Bacon, faculties of the soul, and the three grand departments of human learning to someone at a party? “Dewey Decimal” might have a funny ring to it, but I think we have it lucky.
I should have known that you can’t share a historical mystery with librarians without getting more information: Nicolette Warisse Sosulski recognized that the author of the 1870 article was educator and philosopher William Torrey Harris, and passed me links detailing the direct influence Harris had on Melvyl Dewey.
I’ve updated my post accordingly!
Just found a MARC record in our LMS that was created on 2nd Jan 2049. I guess MARC doesn’t die until sometime after that date :-S— Dave Pattern (@daveyp)
WHEN I SEARCH THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS AUTHORITIES SITE FOR THE AUTHORITY RECORD FOR THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
It’s a catalog card for a book about cataloging with catalog cards — that’s now in an online catalog. It’s like inception for books.
Catalogers, metadata librarians, digital humanists and coding
I’d like to revisit a recurring theme for this blog — catalogers and metadata librarians learning to code. It’s a topic I think about a lot — especially with regard to the direction our profession is going in and the skills we’re expected to have. Recently, digital humanists have helped me fine-tune my understanding of this issue. I think digital humanists and catalogers have a lot in common because, at heart, many catalogers are humanists — our background is often not computer science, but the humanities. I know that’s true for me. At college, I majored in art and fashion design before switching to religion and theology. The most insightful post I’ve found so far is The Code Problem written by Rafael Alvarado, Associate Director of SHANTI at the Unversity of Virginia. He addresses the question — Why should digital humanists code? — and talks about the assumptions swirling around coding that often cause anxiety and hold people back from learning what’s becoming (in both our fields) an essential skill.
|—||Cataloging Futures: Catalogers, metadata librarians, digital humanists and coding (via quardleardle)|
(via Resource Description & Access (RDA): Art Catalogs Flowchart) #RDA for dummies. This is nice, actually.
J.H. Bowman, Essential Cataloguing (via thecommonlibrarian)
Great advice, not limited to catalog[u]ing.(via librarylinknj)
“May Subdivide Geographically: Wit and Humor in Librarianship, See also: Librarians—Humor”
I love seeing librarian autobiographies!
Love this title.
So I come across weird things when browsing cataloging rules/authority files. My favorite example of proper capitalization is in AACR2 for proper names of Satan. Like “His Satanic Majesty” should be capitalized. Today I came across a gem while trying to look up the correct LCSH subject heading for recipes with eel in it. I was browsing the “cooking” list of terms for eel and came across this. I kind of stared at it for a minute because I was sure it had to be a joke.
The scary thing is that for this heading to exist it means that there are books/materials out there that have at least 20% content of material in them on cooking with semen. I did not know this existed. Thank you classificationweb.net for informing me that people do actually cook with and publish books about semen.
Sometimes? I see a 505 and I’m just…
Apparently AACR2 has provisions for books written by deceased authors through spirit mediums.
You rock, library sciences.