1 / 65

David Williamson Cataloging Automation Specialist Cataloging Directorate Library of Congress

Electronic Table of Contents and Publisher Summaries: Keys to the Library's Book Collections. David Williamson Cataloging Automation Specialist Cataloging Directorate Library of Congress. TOC Counts Go to toccounts.html.

urit
Download Presentation

David Williamson Cataloging Automation Specialist Cataloging Directorate Library of Congress

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. Electronic Table of Contents and Publisher Summaries:Keys to the Library'sBook Collections David Williamson Cataloging Automation Specialist Cataloging Directorate Library of Congress

  2. TOC CountsGo to toccounts.html

  3. http://www.loc.gov/catdir/beat/

  4. Bibliographic Enrichment Advisory Team • Formed in Dec. 1992 as a Cataloging Directorate initiative • Grant from the Edward Lowe Foundation • Purpose: To improve LC bibliographic products and services

  5. Working “Outside the Box” • To develop tools to aid in creating and locating information • To develop innovative workflows and policies • To prepare pilot projects for production (“Proof of Concept”)

  6. “Rules of the Game” • Projects can not distract from Library priorities (e.g. arrearage reduction) • Projects should demonstrate their cost-effectiveness • Projects populated by volunteer staff with minimal disruption to regular assignments

  7. Resources • 22 participating staff from 12 divisions in 4 directorates forming cross-cutting teams • Lowe Foundation grant • Support of the Director for Cataloging and the Director for Public Services and Collections for hardware and software

  8. Some Accomplishments:TCEC • “Text Capture and Electronic Conversion” • CCQ 22:3/4 Brown & Williamson “Cataloging at the Library of Congress in the Digital Age,” 1996 • Planning and Implementing Technical Services Workstations, 1997, M. Kaplan, editor. Chapter 9: Custom Applications: the Library of Congress Experience • Eliminates the need to re-key data • Programmatically provides MARC coding and ISBD punctuation • Converts capitalization in the title, subtitle and table of contents

  9. Some Accomplishments:BEOnline • Goal: To provide both bibliographic and direct access to selected online resources • Model for identifying, selecting, and cataloging of Web resources • Development of selection policies • Creation of “cataloging framework” • Interactive workflow with “traffic manager” • Uses CORC (now)

  10. Some Accomplishments:LCC and LCSH • Financed conversion of T, QA, P, Z, JZ; revision of HJ; some K development, thus contributing to foundation of Classification+ • Financed project to enrich LCSH with additional headings and references from alternative B&E thesauri

  11. Current Projects: Reviews • Beginning 1999, annotating LC bibliographic records with annotations from the “Outstanding Reference Sources” annual list • Beginning 2002, working with reference specialists to identify other possible sources for reviews

  12. Current Projects:Additional Analytics Access • Links from LC catalog records to full-text electronic versions of many social science mono series of the “working paper/ discussion paper” type • Access provided to full range of publications of such important institutions as National Bureau of Economic Research • Undertaken in cooperation with the Joint IMF/World Bank Library

  13. Tables of Contents Projects:Theoretical Foundation • Discovery & Retrieval: “We must provide more information online about what our print collections hold, so that potential users of our holdings can more easily discover the treasurers they contain.” Roy Tennant, LJ, Dec. 15, 2001

  14. Tables of Contents Projects:Theoretical Foundation • Enabling Subject Access: “The limited number of subject headings assigned to monographs as well as the practice of providing a more general subject heading for a monograph that covers several more specific topics resulted in very inadequate subject access to monographs.” Vinh-The-Lam

  15. Tables of Contents Projects:Theoretical Foundation • Entry Level Vocabulary: • 505 and 520 notes account for the largest percentage increase in the number of unique words in bibliographic records, with averages of 15.5 new subject terms per record. Calhoun & Markey, 1987. • If a bridge to bib records is established, key words would provide effective access to controlled vocabularies. Bates & others, 1990s.

  16. Tables of Contents Projects Many students prefer the chaos of the web to the drudgery of the library… New York Times, August 10, 2000

  17. Ways to Get TOCs into Bib Records Catalogers manually type in the TOC Automated – through ECIP Automated – through ONIX Automated – through DTOC

  18. BEAT’s Tables of Contents Projects • ECIP TOC: Electronic CIP manuscripts provided by publishers applying for CIP data • ONIX TOC: ONline Information eXchange data used by publishers to transfer “bibliographic” data • Digital TOC: Scanned from published books in the cataloging stream • ECIP DTOC: hybrid using ECIP info in the DTOC style workflow

  19. Month E-CIPs FY01 7468 Aug. 768 Sept. 515 Oct. 745 Nov. 933 Dec. 927 Jan. 1582 Feb. 1600 March 1670 April 1760 With TOC % 50% 1304 17 3734 199 26 384 148 29 258 196 26 372 302 32 467 305 33 464 506 32 791 518 32 800 489 29 835 494 28 880 E-CIP TOC Production

  20. ECIP TOC DemonstrationShow E-CIP cataloging if possible

  21. ONIX Project • ONIX: ONline Information eXchange • “MARC for publishers” or “HTML for publishers” • Used to send/receive publication information • Used more in Europe but gaining in US

  22. ONIX TOCShow sample ONIX record

  23. ONIX Project • Programming written on overtime using BEAT funds • Created August 2001 • TOC files extracted over Labor Day weekend • TOC files cleaned up and linked in 856 field September – December 2001

  24. ONIX Project • John Wiley Publishers provided the first file of ONIX records • File contained 17K+ records • 15K had TOC at that time • 12K were in LC • 10,090 unique TOCs extracted and linked

  25. ONIX Project – Wiley • 13,160 TOCs to date • American Hospital Pub. • Cliffs Notes • Howell Book House • Hungry Minds • IDG Books ( … for Dummies) • IEEE Press • Jossey-Bass • Macmillan • Pfeiffer

  26. ONIX Project • Houghton Mifflin provided second file of ONIX records • 4,045 records in the file • 113 TOC files extracted and linked

  27. ONIX Project – Houghton Mifflin • 113 records • Chambers • Chapters • Clarion Books • Kingfisher • Larousse • Ticknor & Fields

  28. ONIX Project – McGraw-Hill • 3,375 TOCs • Appleton & Lange • Brown & Benchmark • International Marine • Irwin • Osborne • Ragged Mountain Press • TAB Books • W.C. Brown

  29. ONIX Project – Cambridge • 12,975 TOCs • Center for the Study of Lang. & Info. • Mathematical Assoc. of America • SIGS Books • St. Martin’s Press • Stanford University Press

  30. ONIX Project – Problems

  31. ONIX Project – Problems

  32. ONIX Project – Problems • Inconsistency in coding • ’ vs. ' vs. ' • Inconsistency inter-record and intra-record • Inconsistency from publisher to publisher

  33. ONIX TOC DemonstrationGo to ONIX files on web

  34. Digital TOC(DTOC) PROJECT

  35. DTOC PROCESS • TOCs are digitally scanned into images • Images are edited and converted into text using Prime Recognition OCR software • Files are HTML coded and mounted on LC web server

  36. Selection of DTOC Items Taken from current English-language imprints of research value TOCs must be laid out in straight-forward manner TOCs must have meaningful chapter titles

  37. Current Status of DTOC Currently 2800 TOCs linked to bib records in the 856 field All subject areas are currently covered Currently processing approximately 100 new TOCs per week Goal is 50 new TOCs per day

  38. DTOC STAFF SELECTORS • Bill Vernigor for ASCD • Daiva Barzdukas for HLCD • Gabe Horchler for SSCD • Bruce Knarr for RCCD

  39. DTOC STAFF PROCESSORS • Herb Garrett • Lavette Lee • Melissa Young • Bob August • Young Ki Lee • Helen Pritchett TECHNICAL • Bob August OVERSIGHT • John Byrum

  40. The Cost of TOC Information “BEAT projects should demonstrate their cost-effectiveness” Mid 80s experiment with staff member typing TOC information into 505 field: approx. $35 per title DTOC: initially around $10 per title with older hardware and software DTOC now: with better hardware and software: $2 per title

  41. The Cost of TOC Information ECIP TOC: up to 5 minutes of an average cataloger’s time: $1.69 per title ONIX TOC: cost of initial programming and TOC extraction for 10,090 Wiley TOCs: $.065 per record ONIX TOC: cost of making link to bib record: $.065 per record

  42. Publisher Description Project ONIX files contain a lot of useful information, including publisher descriptions 2,196 descriptions from Houghton Mifflin 4,436 descriptions from McGraw-Hill 14,183 descriptions from Cambridge 20,815 total descriptions

  43. ONIX Publisher DescriptionsGo to ONIX files on web

  44. Abstracts & Summary Project BEAT desire to enhance bib records Abstracts & Summary: pilot to keep the bib enhancement project alive Reviews of ALA’s Best Reference Books of the year added to the bib records in a 520 note (20-30 a year)

  45. The Uses and Usefulness of TOC Data

  46. DTOC Hits on Web

  47. TOC Survey Results August-December 2001

  48. How did you find this TOC file? • Catalog record 216 (61%) • Internet 130 (37%) • TOC Files 10 ( 3%)

  49. Was this TOC information useful to you? • Yes 301 (83%) • No 57 (17%)

  50. Did you click on thelink to go to the bibliographic recordand related links? • Yes 211 (58%) • No 150 (42%)

More Related