Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Website Archivability

With the recent Symposium: 404/File Not Found: Link Rot, Legal Citation and Projects to Preserve Precedent at Georgetown Law School, it’s important to take into consideration the future archivability of the webpages you and your institution create. We all take for granted the fluidity of the web and frequently forget that content on websites changes, and is lost, constantly. This is not just restricted to news sites, but impacts everything from our institutional sites to government and court sites. Many organizations are working to preserve the content on the internet, from individual websites, to the documents, videos, and images that they includes. And they seek to do this in as authentic a way as possible as well as to give future users the ability to access and interact with the sites in the way it was originally intended.


To assist in the creation of websites that promote archiving, Stanford University Libraries recently published a set of Recommendations for Web Builders to Improve the Archivability of Their Content, with archivability referring to “the ease with which the content, structure, and front-end presentation(s) of a website can be preserved and later re-presented, using contemporary web archiving tools.” This documentation builds on other resources relating to web archiving and seeks to improve collective web preservation efforts. 

Friday, October 24, 2014

Library of Congress BIBFRAME update

On September 4th a presentation entitled Bibliographic Framework Initiative (BIBFRAME): Update & Practical Applications was given to Library of Congress staff. Beacher Wiggins, Kevin Ford and Paul Frank deliver an explanation of the current state of BIBFRAME and it's implications for library metadata. The target audience for the presentation is experienced catalogers; BIBFRAME structure and concepts are explicated in an understandable way. Paul Frank attempts to assess the impact of BIBFRAME implementation on the work of a typical cataloger.

The presentation is available for viewing via the Library of Congress' BIBFRAME media portal at http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/media/updateforum-sep04-2014.html.

Friday, October 17, 2014

New report offers recommendations to improve usage, discovery and access of e-content in libraries


A group of professionals from libraries, content providers and OCLC have published Success Strategies for Electronic Content Discovery and Access, a white paper that identifies data quality issues in the content supply chain and offers practical recommendations for improved usage, discovery and access of e-content in libraries.


Success Strategies for Electronic Content Discovery and Access offers solutions for the efficient exchange of high-quality data among libraries, data suppliers and service providers, such as:
  • Improve bibliographic metadata and holdings data
  • Synchronize bibliographic metadata and holdings data
  • Use consistent data formats.

See the article at http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=19772

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

"Court" and "Jurisdiction" in RDA

At its meeting in November, the Joint Steering Committee for the Development of RDA (JSC) will be considering several recommendations submitted by the JSC Technical Working Group intended to clarify the use of "court" and "jurisdiction" and related terms in RDA. According to the abstract provided by the Working Group in its paper, "[t]he main proposal restricts the meaning of 'jurisdiction' to the context of place and separates it from the context of corporate body. Other proposals make appropriate changes to the terminology of RDA instructions and definitions and scope notes of RDA elements and relationship designators."

The responses from the national libraries and library organizations that are members of the JSC run the gamut from nearly complete acceptance (Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals) to complete rejection (German National Library) of the Working Group's recommendations, with other organizations falling somewhere in between. ALA and the Library of Congress have given quite nuanced responses, approving some recommendations and suggesting changes to others.

The Working Group's paper and the organizational responses to it are available at: http://www.rda-jsc.org/working2.html#technical-4.

Wednesday, October 1, 2014

The hidden costs of ebooks for academic libraries

Despite the convenience and attraction of e-books, they actively discourage intense reading and deep learning, according to Peter C. Herman, in a Septemer 29, 2014 post to the Times of San Diego.


http://timesofsandiego.com/opinion/2014/09/29/hidden-costs-e-books-university-libraries/

Monday, September 29, 2014

The Cost of Inaction

We all know that budgets are tight and it’s not always easy to integrate preservation work, especially when it comes to multimedia. However, failing to implement a preservation and/or conservation strategy can have its own costs. To help determine what that cost is, as well as to help prioritize collections, AVPreserve has developed the Cost of Inaction Calculator (COI Calculator).


While AVPreserve is a firm that works with institutions to help them better manage, use, distribute, and preserve their media assets and metadata, "they have developed the COI Calculator as a free tool to help users analyze multimedia collections and make more educated decisions about what to digitize, what to perform lower levels of preservation on, and what to leave in its native state. According to their site, the COI Calculator "helps organizations analyze the implications of varying levels of preservation action when dealing with legacy audiovisual collections. COI adds a data point to ROI, or Return on Investment, and helps articulate what stands to be lost or gained in terms of access, intellect and finances based on different scenarios around digitization, physical storage, digital storage, and media longevity." To help explain the goals of the Cost of Inaction Calculator, they have put together a short video that can be viewed here.

Friday, September 19, 2014

Draft LC-PCC Policy Statement on facsimiles and reproductions available for comment

The Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) has issued a draft LC-PCC Policy Statement which outlines proposed exceptions to the RDA instructions regarding facsimiles and reproductions. RDA currently instructs catalogers to describe a facsimile or reproduction by "record[ing] the data relating to the facsimile or reproduction in the appropriate element. Record any data relating to the original manifestation as an element of a related work or related manifestation, as applicable." The draft Policy Statement proposes deviating from this instruction by recording certain elements as they apply to the original resource, and using the MARC 533 field to record certain other elements as they pertain to the reproduction, mirroring LC's practice under AACR2 chapter 11. In addition, the draft Policy Statement sets forth guidelines on a provider-neutral approach to cataloging print-on-demand materials and photocopies.

The PCC is soliciting feedback on the proposed Policy Statement until September 26. To read the draft, go to the PCC's homepage (http://www.loc.gov/aba/pcc/) and look under "What's New."