LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  June 2011

CODE4LIB June 2011

Subject:

Re: JHU integration of PD works

From:

Peter Noerr <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 15 Jun 2011 21:43:24 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (63 lines)

I would just like to confirm from years of practical experience that Jonathan is right - this is hard technically. Not in principle, but the devil is in the details and they are all different, and often change. The very neat addition to the JHU catalog that Eric reported on that started this thread (https://catalyst.library.jhu.edu/catalog/bib_816990) is an example of what we call secondary searching and/or enrichment. 

And it is available - in our commercial software (not a plug - we don't sell it, just noting that it is not the sort of thing to try yourself on any scale - it takes a lot of resources). Our software is incorporated in the offerings of a number of the ILS and content vendors. Admittedly almost exclusively for federated searching, but the problems are the same. And Jonathan enumerates them pretty well below. So, to answer Karen's question, it can be done if the ILS vendors make the functionality available, and the libraries configure it.

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind
> Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:34 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] JHU integration of PD works
> 
> On 6/15/2011 10:55 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> >
> > I've been struggling with this around the Open Library digital texts:
> > how can we make them available to libraries through their catalogs?
> > When I look at the install documentation for Umlaut [1](I was actually
> > hoping to find a "technical requirements" list), it's obvious that it
> > takes developer chops.
> 
> This isn't neccesarily un-fixable. I have plans to make it easier --
> it's totally possible to make it easier (largely because Rails, on which
> Umlaut is based, has gotten so much better at being easier to
> install/deploy things and have em Just Work), I just need to find time
> (that I'm having trouble finding) to make the changes.
> 
> Eric, as well as Karen,  also asked why no vendors seem interested in
> supplying a product like this -- may be a bit of a chicken and an egg,
> there may not be a market for it -- I have trouble explaining to people
> why Umlaut is actually really cool in the first place, even other
> libraries. Although these conversations help me learn new ways to
> talk/think about it.
> 
> So, I can definitely make Umlaut easier to install and run -- but there
> are still going to be some technical craziness, involved with dealing
> with your local metadata in all it's local idiosyncracies, and dealing
> with matching it to 'remote' data in a way that meets local use cases.
> Like I said before, this is inherently imperfect, but that means that
> there are a bunch of choices to make about what imperfect trade-offs you
> want to make, and these inevitably have to do with the nature of your
> local (mostly cataloging) metadata, and the use cases you are supporting.
> 
> Really, I'm not sure I have faith in our existing vendors to be able to
> do a good job with it -- this is a really complicated thing that Umlaut
> is trying to do, in the end. (from my experience; it didn't sound that
> complicated at first, but it ends up so. Trouble-shooting problems ends
> up being incredibly complex, because there are so many different systems
> involved, and a bug or bad metadata on any one can mess things up).
> 
> So I guess what I'm saying is, if you're talking about Umlaut's approach
> -- it is a technically hard problem in our existing environment.
> ("existing environment" means our really bad local cataloging metadata,
> our multiple silo's of local metadata, and our pretty awful 'link
> resolver' products with poor API's, etc -- also the third party content
> host's poor metadata, lack of API's, etc.  None of these things are
> changing anytime soon). So if you're talking about this approach in
> particular, when Erik asks "is it technical or is political" -- my
> experience with Umlaut definitely definitely says 'technical', not
> 'political'. I've gotten no opposition to what Umlaut's trying to do,
> once people understand it, only dissatisfaction with how well it does it
> (a technical issue).
> 
> Jonathan

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager