Hmm. The LoC directory has become somewhat more sparse than I remembered or
I wouldn't have suggested it, but then I remembered the zbrary directory of
Z39.50 and SRU endpoints.

  https://www.z-brary.com/

However, it doesn't appear to necessarily reflect changes that might have
been made since it was compiled or last updated. The library I mentioned is
listed as Innopac, whereas I know they moved to Ex Libris a few years ago.
At the very least, the port number for the endpoint might have changed,
even if the domain name hasn't.

On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 12:24 PM Tom Keays <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Sounds like it is moot, but I would have tried to determine if the catalog
> supported Z39.50 and pull the MARC records that way. Ex Libris
> theoretically supports the protocol, but I suppose they might charge to
> open up the port.
>
>   https://developers.exlibrisgroup.com/alma/integrations/z39-50/
>
> In a pinch, you might be able to use another library's Z39.50 endpoint for
> the source data. Even records for the educational kits could probably be
> found at another library, especially if you knew of one supporting an
> education program with a hands-on focus. Library of Congress still has a
> web page of Z39.50 resources, including Z39.50 hosts available for testing
> on.
>
>   https://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/resources/
>   https://www.loc.gov/z3950/agency/resources/testport.html
>
> Some years ago, I was interviewing for a systems librarian position (and
> coming from a position as a science librarian) and the library I was
> interviewing with suggested a topic covering mobile catalogs, which were
> becoming a hot button item for library administrators. For my presentation
> to the library staff and faculty, I wrote an extremely ad hoc web interface
> in PHP to simulate a mobile catalog and pulling their own data using
> Z39.50. As I recall, Z39.50, at least with that catalog backend, retrieved
> the MARC records, but not the holdings information linked to it, so the
> call numbers being displayed sometimes did not reflect local cataloging or
> were missing entirely when it was not present in the MARC record. Still,
> good enough that it didn't disgrace me.
>
> Tom
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2025 at 10:55 AM Hammer, Erich F <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> It's a not-very-interesting story of disorganization, poor communication,
>> too few employees and a touch of corporate greed:
>>
>> A nearby, small college shuttered.  Our University decided to try to
>> scoop up the well-regarded early-education program and snag the former
>> library's unique collection of educational "kits".  The former site was
>> scheduled for deletion in short-order, and ExLibris essentially tried to
>> extort us for a ridiculously astronomical amount to give us the records.
>> Nobody thought to ask our sole developer (who may have been able to scrape
>> the records in a useable format) until they had just left for a 3-month
>> parental leave, so someone assigned a student to manually bring up all the
>> records to capture the information.  Their solution was to generate PDFs of
>> every page.  The site and data is no more at this point, so we have what we
>> have.
>>
>> The PDFs were generated with text, not OCR'd (as I originally suggested),
>> so the text is accurate.  However, the strings are broken up, and of
>> course, PDF readers don't know how the text "fits" together.  Thus,
>> selected text is recognized in columns, but not of the same length due to
>> wrapping.  It's a mess.
>>
>> Erich
>>
>>
>> On Monday, July 21, 2025 at 21:48, Kyle Banerjee eloquently inscribed:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 12:20 PM Hammer, Erich F <[log in to unmask]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Without going into details, we inherited a sizeable collection of
>> physical
>> >> materials from another library, and were only able to capture the
>> unique
>> >> MARC records in image (PDF) form.
>> >
>> > The details provide the parameters for the easiest/best methods  (and
>> > it's hard to imagine there's not a good story behind getting stuck with
>> > images of records without actually having records). I assume there's a
>> > reason you don't just do the conversion in Acrobat or use one of the
>> > many utilities or services.
>> >
>> > A true OCR process is likely to be error prone, I'd be concerned about
>> > positional data and encoding issues even if the other stuff is right.
>> > Parsing for identifiers and downloading actual MARC records might prove
>> > faster and more reliable if these aren't local only.
>> >
>> > kyle
>>
>>
>>