1 / 30

The Forest & the Trees: HKCAN beyond CJK Cataloging

The Forest & the Trees: HKCAN beyond CJK Cataloging. Presented by Charlene Chou Columbia University HKCAN Seminar & Opening Oct. 4, 2002. Levels of Perspective:. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:. Major contributions and benefits: See vernacular scripts!

opal
Download Presentation

The Forest & the Trees: HKCAN beyond CJK Cataloging

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Forest & the Trees:HKCAN beyond CJK Cataloging Presented by Charlene Chou Columbia University HKCAN Seminar & Opening Oct. 4, 2002

  2. Levels of Perspective:

  3. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging: • Major contributions and benefits: • See vernacular scripts! • Easier for access and research by patrons knowing original language • Solve problem of romanization • Let the unique name be unique! • Not share same authority record due to same romanization • Break conflict of non-unique name records

  4. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging: • Reality check • For current CU workflow, we cannot disassociate with LC/NAF policy or workflow. How can we best use HKCAN? • Vernacular: best for patrons to read and differentiate, but few ILS have implemented Unicode yet. How can names be searched and indexed in vernacular?

  5. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 1--keep current status: • If using HKCAN as a reference to create records in NAF (CU EAL librarian’s Q & A) • Only check HKCAN or can check other databases, too in routine workflow? • If more than 2 databases, how to resolve conflict, if existing? HKCAN is more authoritative? • Can use birth datefrom HKCAN as qualifier for NAF and cite in 670, even if it’s not on the piece?

  6. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 1--example in NAF:

  7. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 1--example in HKCAN:

  8. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 1 • Suggestions for HKCAN • Contribute NACO heading with birth date and with 667 note from non-unique name record • Extract the name from non-unique name record • In HKCAN, cite LC/NAF number for future linking function

  9. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 2 • Linking HKCAN with NAF by 7xx field • Continue to create or maintain non-unique name records in NAF • Link multiple HKCAN records to one non-unique name record by 7xx in NAF • more complex if 5xx present • Break non-unique name record if enough evidence supports, e.g. birth/death date

  10. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 2, example a in NAF

  11. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 2, example a in HKCAN

  12. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 2, ex. a in NAF after linking

  13. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging:Scenario 2, example b:

  14. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging: • Other concerns for HKCAN • How to have a consistent file with NLC? How to interface with NLC records? • Vernacular characters are crucial for CJK cataloging; thus, is HKCAN a good model for Japanese and Korean cataloging, too? • Software compatible with different authority databases?

  15. I. Impact on CJK Cataloging: • The function of authority file • Is it time for NACO to reconsider workflow for “non-unique name” if linking with HKCAN? • Helpful for patrons to find different authors’ work, or maybe more confusing if more linking involved? • Can multiple linking among databases be the instrument for global or international virtual authority file?

  16. II. Multilingual Records:(multiscript->multicontext record) • DP2001-05 for authority & then next step for cataloging record • Model C: contextfield (extensible/flexible) • Keep Model B’s advantages: • linking flexibility--keep record simple for language of cataloging • Expand from language to catalog context • More user-oriented • Maybe more useful in Web environment

  17. II. Multilingual Records--current research for cross-language retrieval

  18. II. Multilingual Records: • Unicode for Asian characters • HKCAN • Good! --1xx & 7xx headings can swap • 7xx field for linking • language: linking to DLC/NAF with control # if matches • audience: linking to other files, e.g. thesaurus • Use Big5 display for traditional Chinese scripts • can switch view choice for simplified scripts!

  19. III. FRBR: • Possible hierarchical display • Same work • expression one: Chinese • expression two: English • Two authority records linked to the same expression in Chinese? • As on Web, a choice of view/display • English/Chinese • IE->view->encoding or Navigator->view->character sets

  20. III. FRBR:Example

  21. IV. Indexing on Web/Internet: • Arbitrary (search engine) vs. authority control (library catalog)? • Depends on user’s needs, e.g. disciplinary • ex. MEDLINE • Semantic web building blocks • Google, Yahoo & search engines • Open vs. restricted domains • INSPEC vs. Google

  22. IV. Indexing on Web/Internet: • Learn from Google? • PageRank--vast link structure • greater weight to links from higher-ranking pages • most important page on a topic or well-respected overview • Text-matching techniques • Up-to-date & broader coverage • Everything in its indexes is available online with open access

  23. IV. Indexing on Web/Internet: • Learn from multilingual setting in Internet? • Cataloging records for OPAC only, or more for linking to indexing services for web resources? • SFX: good for integrating resources and helping patrons from reference perspective

  24. V. What’s Next?

  25. V. What’s Next? • IFLA UBC authority principle • definition of “each country”? • Challenge--how to consolidate a national authority file for Chinese language? • Goal: precision and/or recall? • Challenge: consistency • Interim strategy: linking different records for one name?

  26. V. What’s Next? • Expand HKCAN to center of Chinese Authority file? • Link databases for China, Taiwan and other Asian countries, or how to exchange data? • MARC/CN MARC, Chinese software compatible? • How to handle issues for both traditional and simplified scripts? • Link with other databases, e.g. LC/NAF and others

  27. V. What’s Next? • HKCAN more in Web environment • Includes more for electronic resources • not just link to authority file but to other resources, too • URL information in records • Maintenance • some done by machine but some cannot

  28. V. What’s Next? • Apply same model for Japanese and Korean materials? Then other Asian languages? • Japan • Easier: one country--merge two major files • Low frequency of non-unique name records within LC/NAF, e.g. knowing birth dates • Korea • More complex: two countries

  29. V. What’s Next? • Expand HKCAN to subject authority file? • Multilingual thesauri in cross-language text and speech retrieval; advanced linguistic processing tools; machine translation systems • MACS (multilingual access to subjects) • Same term: different meaning for the language • e.g. cell phone=Handy (German) vs. handy (English) • For Chinese language, different wording for same subject (local culture)

  30. Congratulations to HKCAN!Thank you all!

More Related