Libera Libro

Free the books: 94053494

Archive for the ‘Collection management.’ Category

Up or down a shelf doesn’t matter. Does it?

Posted by arlekeno on October 22, 2014

IMG_20131217_150212 IMG_20131217_150205

Funny how if you ignore the signs on the shelf or the books around it you tend to get funny results


Posted in Collection management., Free the books. | Leave a Comment »

Can you at least get it on the shelf?

Posted by arlekeno on June 16, 2014

2014-06-16 15.42.55 2014-06-16 15.43.06


Looks good, then you look underneath. Why I don’t let other people shelve books.

Posted in Collection management., Library | Leave a Comment »

Be careful who dusts your library.

Posted by arlekeno on April 10, 2014


This may look innocent enough, a nice little section all in order.


But if you look closely, it is UNDERNEATH the 531’s !


And to the left of the 534’s



Someone decided to dust the shelves, and moved this tiny section, and then

put it back on the wrong shelf!



Posted in Collection management., Library | Leave a Comment »

Why I hate students putting books back.

Posted by arlekeno on March 25, 2014


First photo is a lovely shot of what happens when someone only looks at the label’s first letter and not the actual last name of the author ( let alone first name, or book title etc).

But since It is between 3 books by the same author, and how famous that series is, the lack of care is ASTOUNDING!



Looks like a well put away set of books?




But look from above! The book is pushed back, by a careless returner of books.





Eventually this happens! and books “vanish” for monthe.

Posted in Collection management., Free the books., Library | Leave a Comment »

ETL505 – Thesauri.

Posted by arlekeno on August 25, 2012

Below is an an answer to the question ‘What is a thesaurus?’. It comes from the Introduction to the MDA (Museum Documentation Association) Archaeological Objects Thesaurus.

A thesaurus is a tool which helps indexers and searchers to choose words consistently to describe things or concepts. The thesaurus is structured in such a way that related words are grouped together and cross-referenced to other groups of words which may be relevant to the subject. Where there is a choice of words with the same or similar meanings, the thesaurus provides a single preferred word and, by arranging terms in a hierarchy, allows the selection of more general or specific words. The purpose of the thesaurus is to standardise the use of terminology, which not only helps in indexing information but also in its retrieval.

From Willpower Information’s

My main purpose in this paper is to make three points:

  • A simple name list without some rules will rapidly become a mess.
  • Only three simple rules are needed; using them will make life easier for you, not harder.
  • So long as you stick to these rules, you can take an existing thesaurus and adapt it to your needs; you are not limited to using the terms which are listed in it already, and you are not obliged to use more detail than you need.

What are these rules?

  1. Use a limited list of indexing terms, but plenty of entry terms
    — link these withUSEandUSE FOR (UF)relationships.
  2. Structure terms of the same type into hierarchies
    — link these withBROADER TERM/NARROWER TERM (BT/NT)relationships.
  3. Remind users of other terms to consider
    — link these withRELATED TERM/RELATED TERM (RT/RT)relationships.

All good here, looks a lot like the SCIS Subject Headings. Not to mention some good Boolean logic etc. I hope my catalogue does this, but I doubt it.

A bit up in the air on the rules for Broader terms and Narrower terms. Esp in the Previous subject heading rules. For me it is always like Japanese Address, You go Most general to most specific and include all.

Still need more info on what HEIRACHIES means in this field.


The Schools Online Thesaurus (ScOT)

OK, SO SCIS is based on Literary warrant ( what already exists) in pre-computer days, ScOT was designed specifically for PC world and systematic coverage of the national syllabus (Hider pg178). .. Will ScOT replace SCIS? N.B., Scis is pre-coordinated (& Inverted headings), which may not be as important to Gen 4 search engines.

Used more commonly for abstracting and indexing systems and online indexing ( are lib catalogues more like online indexes now? ) pg147 More specific, single terms, and better relationships.

Anyway, to the SCOT website. THE VISUAL INTERFACE IS SO MUCH BETTER FOR A VISUAL LEARNER LIKE ME!   Ok, pg 9 of 15 deals a little with the Hierarchies I think.

Just compared a list of words in Scot to Scishl. The thesaurus had better relationships and more specific terms. (and a better screen layout).

Last Question on ScOT… How do i search TaLE with it?


Some of the tools we have examined in this module can be used to provide better subject access to online materials as well as to physical ones; indeed, some of them have been designed for online resources – search engines, for example. However, there are some aspects of web resources which make things particular hard, when it comes to subject access.

  • First, there are so many more resources on the web than in even the biggest library, so vocabulary control is particularly challenging.
  • Second, there are many different media, often within the same resource, and how to integrate text-based retrieval with non-text-based retrieval remains a largely unanswered question.
  • Third, there are many different users, who might want the same resources materials, but for different reasons and content.
  • Fourth, web resources are notoriously granular – is the subject of a website what is on the home page, or on the majority of pages, or all the pages, or on all parts of all the pages?
  • Fifth, web resources change very frequently. A new page may be added with a new subject; a website may be revamped so that some subjects are no longer covered.

We have certainly not yet created a set of tools which fully overcome all these problems.

Text book Chap 9:

We wish library Cats were as good as google … sigh.

Subject Directories, pg 170. Again, “filtering up”? And yahoo is one? and

Will skip the web searches, did that last subject or two I think, Straight to subject gateways or portals, Selected and controlled, E.G.
The internet library for librarians.
I wonder If I can use it for essays.

Pg 176, a good Subject access system needs, Simplicity ( coz a lot of it isn’t done by experts). Interoperability (distribution across countries, subject areas etc) and Scalability (rang of places it can be used).

DDC to be used for online standard? i think it could work. We all looked at it as kids.

Ontologies and taxonomies? Interesting pg182.

Ooh, I would like to be an information architect.  but Social tagging and folksonomies we did a few subjects back. pg183

Seriously, we should make IT people do this subject.

Open this link later

Taxonomies : beyond thesauri and classification?

Liz Edols

INF209 – Describing and Analysing Information Resources INF425 – Describing and Analysing Information Resources ETL505 – Bibliographic Standards in Education 2001

Keyword Searching and school library OPACs.

Ok, all about boolean v Keyword searches in SCIS, not much new here. But a good article on “Automatic Indexing” By Glenda Brown 1996

Social Tagging and Folksonomies, again, already done this.

It is the responsibility of the teacher librarian to ensure the subject access to resources provided through the catalogue is suitable to the needs and abilities of the library’s users and that the subject access potential of the library automation system/OPAC in use is fully utilised.

Where SCIS bibliographic records are used in the OPAC the teacher librarian should:

  • use SCIS products to create a full controlled vocabulary reference structure;
  • maintain the subject authority file to ensure there are no anomalies which will adversely affect subject retrieval;
  • with caution, add local or additional subject headings and cross references when it is important to do so. Ensure the validity of the controlled vocabulary approach is not breached by such additions;
  • be thoroughly conversant with the means provided in your OPAC for using the natural language approach;
  • utilise this potential by adding to subject records in the notes area where this will be of benefit to your users;
  • tutor your users in the effective use of the controlled vocabulary and natural subject access available to them.

In Module 6 we move on to the related area of classification.



Posted in Collection management., Library | Leave a Comment »

Module 5.3: SCIS subject headings.

Posted by arlekeno on August 23, 2012

The subject analysis process
This section has been adapted from the SCIS Standards for Cataloguing and Data Entry. The subject indexing process involves the following:
Scanning the resource to determine the subject content. In some cases this will involve viewing videos or websites.
Assessing the predominant theme(s) of the resource. The catalogue user’s perspective is considered as well.
Translating the theme(s) into allowed subject headings from the list.
Entering the subject heading(s) in the bibliographic record using the appropriate fields as established by the library system.

I have done all of these within my own library, and apparently we only need to do 2and 3 in the next task.. YAY!

It is traditional and sound practice to assign subject headings, which match as closely as possible the subject content of the resource. In other words subject headings are assigned to the level of the subject(s) covered in the resource.

When assigning subject headings it is important to ensure that no major theme of the resource being catalogued is overlooked. The set of headings selected needs to be co-extensive with all the major themes contained within that resource.

Again, this is just common sense (and the source of many debates between my office ladies and I).

4.1.1 Generalities versus specificity
The principle is to prefer several specific subject headings rather than a general, broader subject heading. (Then a how bunch of rules about precedence)

NOW this one is interesting. as they would not use the SH MATHS. Apparently the catalog will “Guide” people there.

4.5 Resources on a broad subject with multiple related subjects
For resources dealing with several subjects that are all related as more specific headings within a broader subject, but are treated separately within the resource, assign a subject heading for each specific subject.
Title: Algebra, geometry, trigonometry [videorecording]
Subject: Algebra
In the example above, the heading Mathematics would not be assigned as the reference structure within the catalogue will guide users from the broader term to more specific headings.

5.1 Fiction as a standard subdivision

A bunch of rules of what you can do for fiction, e.g. subheading, place, awards etc.

Looking at teh study task..

It makes pretty good sense if you have  kids who have learnt how to do more than one search and think in terms of synonyms.

Devising additional headings

Headings that may be devised by the cataloguer consist of:
1. proper names, for example names of individuals, peoples, places, organisations and projects

common names belonging to well-known categories including sport, food, animals, chemicals, plants and vehicles.

6.3 Devising adjectival headings

Such an example is the instruction given under the heading for Art:
SEN The adjectival form for a national* or ethnic* group/style may be added as needed, e.g. Art, European.

6.4 Devising phrase headings

SEN For subjects in art use phrase headings in the form [Subject] in art, e.g. Animals in art.

Honestly, I think I will just re-read the whole thing when it is time for the assessment task. I am amazed how well set out it is really.

6.5 Using the subdivisions
Words or phrases added to headings in the list after the long dash ( – ) are referred to as subdivisions (e.g. Literatures – Collections). These subdivisions are additional concepts which make headings more specific.

Honestly, there are just so many and too many to summarize. I will just read the whole thing properly for the Assess task 2.

I will really need to explore EVERY possible angle when I do the task 2. Some of the exercises e.g. 20, about grasslands v Grassland ecology are beating me.

CROSS REFERENCES (from pg 26 of 37 of Mod 5).

My catalogue has no cross references.. oh the shame 😥

If we fail to provide cross references we are:

  • undermining the effort that has been put into assigning subject headings;
  • reducing the effectiveness of the catalogue as a retrieval tool; and
  • creating frustrations for our users who will be less inclined to use the catalogue.

For example, a catalogue may have records of works under the subject heading ‘Magnetism’. Users who search under this term will find the works, but unless cross references have been provided to guide users from rejected headings such as ‘Magnets’,

e.g. Magnets
see Magnetism,

or from broader subject headings such as ‘Physics’,

e.g. Physics
see also Magnetism.

Hang on, I just did a search in SENTRAL, and only MAGNETISM showed up, did it in OASIS, MAGNETS did too!.

BUT! How do I cross-reference in my system?

HIDER CHAP 5: Authority Controls.

Authority Control has 3 aspects – Uniqueness – Standardisation – linkages- (pg 85) with the process having 3 steps.

  1. Distinguishing names and titles: forms of names created and processed uniformly.
  2. Showing relationships: Linking different version s of the same body to each other, e.g. Twain, M. Twain, Mark, Samuel Clement.
  3. Documenting Decisions: Record how you chose a heading, so later people can be consistent ( hence Ass.Task.2)

Would make life easier, but is expensive.

Honestly, looking at the SCIS authority files, I have no idea what I am doing, ior if I can use it even if I can afford it?




Posted in Collection management., Library | Leave a Comment »

Module 4: Metadata Standards

Posted by arlekeno on August 3, 2012

Today we do more on Metadata standards, the ISBD, AACR2, RDA and Marc. I am particularly interested as AACR2 and RDA must be compared in Ass.task 1, due in 2 weeks, and Marc is the standard we use in NSW school libraries.

First, the Hider text from Section II, Chapter 2. And the introduction already mentions something I have not thought about, “bibliographic description” which covers the non-subject areas, e.g. Author, title, size. i had never even seperted these when looking at the info.

Why have standards? Economy, time saving, sharing, easier access and cataloging etc PG 32.

Pg 34: Dublin core exists only for the core elements of meta data. “DC gives the cataloguer the freedom to adopt different styles and vocabularies within its framework” (So I could use a DC frame but use LCSH or SCIS SH with little effect on the core).

“DC is therefore considered by many to be more flexible than older, pre-digital standards”

and now, The ISBD guides.

ISBD(G): General International Standard Bibliographic Description

the first Consider is how to you think using standard punctuation helps make these surrogate records more easily understandable. (Why Surrogate records? )

I will consider this as part of standardisation. If everyone uses and knows the same method, everyong has a better chance of understanding the information in the same way. Also handle for being machine readable.

Why has ISBD been successful?

One reason for ISBD’s success is because it provides an easily learnt standard framework for describing documents. This framework can be applied to documents in a wide variety of formats, and in any language. The key to its success is that it uses a standard framework of eight areas and standard punctuation in a fixed order. The eight areas, which were developed from the characteristics of a wide range of documents, are:

  1. Title and statement of responsibility area
  2. Edition area
  3. Material (or type of publication) specific details area
  4. Publication, distribution, etc. area
  5. Physical description area
  6. Series area
  7. Note area
  8. Standard number and terms of availability area.

The standard punctuation full stop space dash space (. – ) is used in ISBD to separate the different data elements (called areas in ISBD), and other punctuation is used within each area:

Title and statement of responsibility area. – Edition area. – Material (or type of publication) specific details area. – Publication, distribution, etc. area. – Physical description area. – Series area. – Note area. – Standard number and terms of availability area.

I think this judgement about why it is good will come in handy for the first assesment task.

Study task

Prepare a description of your textbook using ISBD. Follow these steps:

  • identify the data elements in the book (for example, identify the book’s title and author – this is the first ISBD area). Note that not all of the eight data elements may apply to your example.

Apply the standard punctuation between the areas.

Organising Knowledge in a global society: Principles and practices in libraries and information centres / Phillip Hider with Ross Harvey. – Wagga Wagga, NSW : Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, 2008. – Rev.Ed. – 372 p ; 24.5 cm. – Topics in Australiasian Library and Information Studies ; 29. – ISBN 978 1 876938 67 3.

(I used and and to work this out).

On to Hider Chap 3 ( I will read the whole thing.) MUCH better description of ISBD than the IFLA website! pg 42 and page 45 looks very important for the first ass.task. Some see the ISBD prescriptors as irrelevent online, particulalry the punctuation and fixed order. Many people fail to understand the punctuation. DC is more flexible, being developed in an online world. RDA can omit punctuation.

(maybe using 4th Gen search engines… check that!~)

Now to AACR 2. in the notes and textbook. Esp from pg 52 /the main characteristics/


I am going to look at the other standards, but If I cant get my head around this Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records stuff, I am stuffed.

anyway, Conclusion to Chap 3 (pg 62):Characteristics of a “good” standard of description. (maybe use for Ass.Task1)

  • Its product (the description0 should be as brief as possible,
  • It should be easily understood by the user,
  • It should be easy to apply to all information resources,
  • it should be widely accepted and used (internationally if possible), and
  • it should be economical to apply.

On to Chapter 4 in “Organising knowledge in a Global Society”

It appears  to be all about what terms we use to fill the differetn areas. Which makes sense after the subject heading discussions.

BUT< I am looking for info on AACR2 and why it is being replaced. One question is primary responsibility and main entry (pg 65) This is to do with who we credit as Author/creator. Some have a MAIN ENTRY, as in a chief access point ( where you search from? And I thought this was who was the main creator.) there are also other access points subservient to teh main point (pg70) but again, redundant in modern searches. But it looks like the main entry is usually the chief person/body responsible.

looking at the chief and other access point things, I am thinking that the whole subject/keyword/tagging things available on most search engines go beyond this, no wonder AACR2 is considered old hat.

Now it looks like SCIS as the Aus Library are going to RDA, so I better catch up! Also, “It has been designed for compatibility with other standards and for the potential use of the metadata and semantic web communities beyond libraries. Particular effort has been made to ‘internationalise’ the code by eliminating Anglo-American bias.”

Ok, while AACR2 is about form and content, RDA is only about content. Its about attribute s of and relationships between entities. Based on FRBR and FRAD… which I don’t understand yet 😦 Going to read “what is FRBR” to see if it helps.

What is FRBR: Barbara Tillet

Ok, its a little clearer now. I think, from Clear as mud to mear murky water. I need more info on the Work-Expression-Manifestation-Item idea. I think it is to do with different versions of the same creation. I am skipping the next part just to look at FRBR. … YAY,. this is a MUCH BETTER explanation than the Library of Congress one. Thank you library geek! I think this “entity relationship” thing could be an answer to some of the frustration I feel when I search for a copy of the book and the Sentral/Oasis search gives me the different ISBN number versions, so different manifestations of the same expression, when I would rather have all the same expression as one search result. I am used to the different versions/manifestations having their own result now, but I had to learn that and I dislike it.

Also Really helpful for FRBR and this one on linked Data

Now back to the Lib of Congress RDA Changes from AACR2 for Texts on youtube. with the power point notes as well by Barbara Tillett
“RDA is a web tool” (3.56 min) “Meant to be used by searching the related-relevant instructions”. not meant to be read from beginning to end.

“organised around user tasks to help users to identify and relate the resources needed”.

“meet the new international cataloging principles”

relies more on Catalogers judgement.. (good thing? )

Workflows looks handy, not sure I can use it for the task though.

less adjusting of information (saves time) allows natural searching.

replaces the AACR2 “rule of 3” for creator.


There is a lot of talk about take what you see, I am worried how this will effect sequenced articles if, for example, a magazine goes from Volume 4 to Volume V.

More accurate language searches, less polyglot

Uses the goals of FRAD and FRBR to improve RELATIONSHIPS and IDENTIFICATION e.g. Naming of relationship of person to resource (in MARC FORMAT) or for pen names.

Ok, reading Hider again, Pg 56. This starts to make sense. RDA will be based on FRBR, which derives from how the user will Find, Identify select and obtain. In short, this will reduce the number of clicks to find an item, shorten search time and mean more people will have successful searches. ( I need to find a quote about people giving up with frustration with poor search results).

Resource description and Access by Kiorgaard:

from pg6, talking about why RDA is better for future database structure as opposed to the old flat file structure.

In some library systems today, and increasingly in the future, data will be stored in a
relational or object‐oriented database structure that mirrors the FRBR and FRAD conceptual
models. In this type of structure there would be separate records for each FRBR entity.
Relationships between the entities would be made using links. The links might be access
points, but are more likely to be identifiers, preferably persistent identifiers. The changes
made in RDA will help us move towards this future.

Advantages of RDA

  1. RDA as a cataloguing tool: interactive and online.
  2. Better Coverage: of range of resource types (especially online).
  3. Resource Categorisations: improved ability to select a resource by replacing GMD ( e.g. music/text) with the Media category, the type of carrier and type of content… So if you need a computer to read it, you will be told.
  4. Relationships: easier searching of related works.

Also reading:  Six Letters That Count, ILS + RDA = A Better School Library Experience by Anita Brooks Kirkland

Talks about why people prefer google, ( spell check, ranking) Our current searches only do the access points, not the full text etc.

Kevin Randall’sRDA: End of the world postponed? (The Serials Librarian, 2011, 61, p.334-345)

hope for future proofing. esp in types of resources.

Joy Anhalt, & Richard Stewart’s RDA simplified (Cataloging &Classification Quarterly 2012, 50(1), p. 33-42) which overviews a number of differences between AACR2 and RDA.

Good quote from on WHY RDA on page 34. Simplify and set standard for all resources.

A IT IS FOR ALL resources, no adding extra chapters as with AACR2.


Finally, the Official Australian Homepage of RDA: Australian Committee of Cataloguing.

Module 4 Continued later. For all your Contracting needs.

Posted in Collection management., Library | Leave a Comment »

Module 3: Introducing Metadata

Posted by arlekeno on July 24, 2012

You would have already come across the term ‘metadata’ in the readings. What is it? (Or more correctly, What are they?) Hider (2008, p.332) defines metadata as ‘a set of elements that describes an information resource’.

Makes pretty good sense to me, information about the information, e.g. The number of pages, year of production. I think it is general to meet all the possible needs. BUT to look up 3 other definitions.

First, Wikipedia, the first search result.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the page on metadata about Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Metadata.

The term metadata is an ambiguous term which is used for two fundamentally different concepts (types). Although the expression “data about data” is often used, it does not apply to both in the same way. Structural metadata, the design and specification of data structures, cannot be about data, because at design time the application contains no data. In this case the correct description would be “data about the containers of data”. Descriptive metadata, on the other hand, is about individual instances of application data, the data content. In this case, a useful description (resulting in a disambiguating neologism) would be “data about data content” or “content about content” thus metacontent. Descriptive, Guide and the National Information Standards Organization concept of administrative metadata are all subtypes of metacontent.[citation needed]

Ok, i would have gone with Data about Data, but the term Meta-content (though un-cited) appeals to me. Interesting that Libraries had it first.

Anyway, now to a more reliable and relevant resource. The National Library of Australia.


What is metadata? My impression, from a number of recent meetings which I have attended, is that the concept is proving difficult to define with clarity. The Macquarie Dictionary defines the prefix “meta-” as meaning “among”, “together with”, “after” or “behind”. That suggests the idea of a “fellow traveller”: that metadata is not fully fledged data, but it is a kind of fellow-traveller with data, supporting it from the sidelines. My definition is that “an element of metadata describes an information resource, or helps provide access to an information resource”. A collection of such metadata elements may describe one or many information resources.

It is inherent in the concept of metadata that there is an association of some kind between the metadata and the information resource which it describes. For example, a library catalogue record is a collection of metadata elements, linked to the book or other item in the library collection through the call number. Information stored in the “META” field of an HTML Web page is metadata, associated with the information resource by being embedded within it. The indexing data held by Web crawlers is also metadata (though not very good metadata) – linked to the information resource through the URL.

Metadata can be an information resource in its own right. For example, a review of a film – which on one level is a piece of metadata related to the film – is, on another level, a literary work with its own author and perhaps its own intellectual property constraints.

Now this is the Professional view… 1) its not clear! 2) its not data but hangs out with Data (like its posse?) 3) it can be useful information in its own right.  You will notice I extended this example to talk of the embedded data in Web pages. just to keep us up to date.

Finally, from the Australian National Data Service.

Who needs to know this?

This is a general introduction which is likely to be of interest to researchers, their support staff, data centre and repository staff and research administrators.


The term metadata refers to information used to describe items and groups of items. It is data about data. It can be used to describe physical items as well as digital items (files, documents, images, datasets, etc.). A library catalogue, for example, is made up of metadata describing the books, journals and other items held by the library. The File Properties for a word processing document is a rudimentary (and imperfect) metadata record.

Item level metadata is used to describe a single object such as a photograph: who took the photograph, who is in it, the date it was taken, the place it was taken, the type of camera used to take the photograph, and so on.

Collection level metadata is used to describe an aggregation of objects such as the photo album (or CD-ROM or file folder) that contains a group of photographs: the size of the collection, who took the photographs (there may be more than one person), the time period over which the photographs were taken, and so on. Some of these attributes, such as ‘Title’ may be the same as those used to describe an individual photograph.

Metadata adds value to documents or images. For scientific data, metadata is even more important because it provides the context needed to make sense of what would otherwise be a collection of random numbers.

Types of metadata

The metadata elements used to describe either an item or a collection can serve different purposes. Some examples include:

  • Descriptive metadata, such as the name of the photographer, the subject of the photograph, the date and time that the photograph was taken;
  • Technical metadata, such as the type of camera used, the file format in which the photograph is stored, the exposure time and dimensions of the photograph, and so on;
  • Access or rights metadata, defining who is allowed to view to this photograph and under what conditions; and
  • Preservation metadata, which allows a digital preservation expert to keep track of actions taken to preserve or sustain the photograph for later access and use.

This is a good one because of the detail. I like that it says Metadata adds value to data. So we can make sense of it.

What do these 3 definitions have in common? They all say its data about data. I think the last one says it best by saying it adds value.

Although the current version of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (the second edition, 2002 revision) includes guidance for cataloguing digital material, many librarians think that it does not do so very effectively.

Think back, for a moment, to the reasons for wanting to organise information. We do it so that we can provide access. Here’s a relevant quote about why we need metadata:

Metadata is crucial to searching. If searching is, today, largely a matter of matching query words with words in the text of articles, then anything that makes the matching process easier or more standardized is bound to improve the process. Metadata is expected to improve matching by standardizing the structure and content of indexing or cataloging information. (Jessica Milstead & Susan Feldman, ‘Metadata: Cataloging by Any Other Name …’, Online, January 1999 .)

Onwards to Dublin Core

Levels of the standard

The Dublin Core standard includes two levels — Simple and Qualified. Simple Dublin Core comprises 15 elements; Qualified Dublin Core includes three additional elements;— Audience, Provenance and RightsHolder;— as well as a group of element refinements, also called qualifiers, that refine the semantics of the elements in ways that may be useful in resource discovery.

[edit] Simple Dublin Core

The Simple Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (DCMES) consists of 15 metadata elements:[2] (from Wiki)

  1. Title
  2. Creator
  3. Subject
  4. Description
  5. Publisher
  6. Contributor
  7. Date
  8. Type
  9. Format
  10. Identifier
  11. Source
  12. Language
  13. Relation
  14. Coverage
  15. Rights

Each Dublin Core element is optional and may be repeated. The DCMI has established standard ways to refine elements and encourage the use of encoding and vocabulary schemes. There is no prescribed order in Dublin Core for presenting or using the elements.

From the notes :

It is important to note that Dublin Core metadata is based on four principles:

  • Simplicity – DC was designed to be applied by the people who create the information resources, rather than by information professionals.
  • Semantic interoperability – DC must be useable in different disciplines, and not be limited to any one subject area or group of subjects.
  • International consensus – because the internet operates across national boundaries, DC is developed by an international, interdisciplinary group.
  • Extensibility – DC is designed to be flexible so that it can be built on if required by specialist applications.

And some examples of what it all looks like in Action.


Posted in Collection management., Library, Organisations | Leave a Comment »


Posted by arlekeno on July 18, 2012

Reading From Chapter 14 of  “Organising Knowledge in a Global Society (Princilpes and practices of libraries and information centres)” Revised Edition 2008 By Philip Hider with Ross Harvey…. Local Systems and OPACS.

An Integrated Library system (ILS) Definition pg 277

  • An ILS relies on the same data in a single database to provide four basic functions (aquisitions, cataloguing, circulation, and online public access catalogue).
  • The Database comprises bibliographic data (e.g., cataloguing records) as well as other data neccesary to carry out library-related functions (e.g. borrower files for circulation purposes)

The effectiveness of all the modules will stand or fall on factors such as the quality of the records in it and its ease of use.

I like this on OPAC T; the Goal of teh 4th Generation OPAC is to get patrons to prefer a library search to google… That is a BIG CALL!  Google has more money than libraries, but we need to this, because poor search skills leads to little success, leads to google.

Ok, just read chapter 14, now to read Chapter 8 on Controlled Vocabulary, I think here of the SCIS subject headings. Another 30 pages and references to previous chapters the Modules have not asked us to read yet…. Hmm, I think I will call it quits for a while.

A lot of talk about thesauri, and a lot of acronyms.

Activity time, .. oops, server is overloaded… oh well, shall have to wait till tomorrow I guess.

Ok, on now, after a day break, Playing around with it all.

Here’s a brief explanation of why these differences in search results using different internet search engines occur.

First, you need to know about the difference between search engines and directories.

  • Search enginesuse software called web crawlers to gather words from sources such as web page titles and site content. These words are compiled into indexes. Users search the results located by the web crawlers by searching the indexes.
  • Directories of descriptions of websites are compiled from lists of sites reviewed by editors. Users search these descriptions. Generally speaking, a well-designed site with extensive and original content is more likely to be listed in directories. (Google is famous for applying another major criterion: the extent to which pages are linked from other websites.)
  • Search engine softwaresifts through the millions of pages recorded in the index, finding matches and ranking these matches in order of relevance. This relevance ranking is determined in two main ways: by position of the words, and by their frequency.
  • Position: keywords appearing in the title of a web page, or in the first few paragraphs of text, are considered to be more relevant to the topic than words appearing in other positions on the page.
  • Frequency: keywords which appear more frequently in a web page are considered to be more relevant than other words, and so the web pages which contain them are considered more relevant.


Search engine for songs. and for pictures Virtual 24.. this is more like a News Magazine than a museum website to me.



The Berkeley Digital Library SunSITE provides information and support to digital library developers worldwide. It is also an excellent starting point for looking at a range of digital libraries. Select several digital libraries of interest to you. Browse through them, thinking about these questions as you go:

  • Is this a ‘library’ in the traditional sense of the word?
  • What categories of materials (e.g. archival material, museum objects, library material) does it provide access to? SCIS web page. ( something I am familiar with)

Anyway, I am off to read Chapter one of the text, and then I will up to date for the week, FINALLY!



Posted in Collection management., Library, Organisations | Leave a Comment »

Chapter 2: Introduction to Dewey Decimal Classification

Posted by arlekeno on July 10, 2012

The History of Melvil Dewey’s system, Odd to think that before books were classified by where they were. Also interesting to think that the original was 44 pages considering how big my Abridged Vol 12 is! I shall have to download it for free on my iPad.

Would love to get in on the panel that decides the new DDC numbers, I bet that gets a bit heated after a few Sherrys. Anyway, I can get to Dewey online these days via thanks to being a student, though i don’t want to know how much the subscription to that costs!


First Summary = the 10 classes   Second Summary = 10 Divisions  Third Summary = 10 Sections, and after the . Dewey’s Decimal 😛  you get EVEN MORE specific in the hierachy

NUMBER BUILDING ( i.e. the stuff I want and need to know)

Numbers are constructed by taking a number from the Schedules, and adding to it digits from the tables 1-6, or from another part of the schedules (pg 11) Ok, this is the bit I don’t get, the tables. We have some explanation on pg 12, but its only vaguley clearer than mud. I need examples! I vaguely get we can use table 2 to add a location after the decimal, but I need to know in what order we read the tables, what order do we add numbers, and can I look at the bits after the Decimal to work out what it means like I can before the dot?

The Relative index on the other hand makes sense, I will have to look at my copy of the DDC abridged for it, I know we have it for the SCIS subjects in a manner. (am using my town library’s copy, there are NOTES in it EVERYWHERE!)

Advantages of DDC (pg 13 and the Answer to the quiz 2.2 Q4 )

  1. DDC was the first to use the concept of a relative location to organise materials on the shelf.
  2. The Pure Notation (ie all Arabic Numerals) is recognised internationally.
  3. The straightforward numerical sequence facilitates filing and shelving.
  4. The Relative Index brings together different aspects of the same subject which are scattered in different disciplines.
  5. The hierarchical notation expresses the relationship between the class numbers.
  6. The decimal system theoretically enables infinite expansion and subdivision.
  7. the Mnemonic notation helps user to memorise and recognise class numbers (hmmm)
  8. Periodic revision keeps it up to date.

Disadvantages of DDC (pg 13 and the answer to Quiz 2.2 Q5 )

  1. Its Anglo-American bias is evident in its emphasis on American, English and European language, literature and history in the 400s, 800s and 900s, Protestantism/Christianity in the 200s.
  2. Some related disciplines are seperated: 400/800; 300/900.
  3. Some subjects are not very comfortably placed: e.g – Library science in 000; Psychology as part of Philosophy in 100.
  4. In the 800s, Literary works by the same author are scattered according to form: E.g. Shakespeare’s poems are seperated from plays.
  5. Decimal numbering limits its capacity for accomidating subjects on the same level – There can only be 9 divisions (+ 1 general division)
  6. Different rates of growth of some disciplines have resulted in an uneven structure: e.g. 300 & 600 are particularly overcrowded.
  7. Although theoretically expansion is infinite, it doesn’t allow infinite insertion between related numbers, e.g. 610 and 619.
  8. Specificity results in long numbers, which can be awkward for shelving on spine labels.
  9. Altering numbers because of a new edition creates practical problems in libraries, e.g. the need for reclassification, relabelling and reshelving ( I wonder which DDC the SCIS uses for school stuff, I think it is 21, I shall have to check).

Exercise 2.1 is something I do everyday at work, SO I am ok with that. Onto 2.2. The QUIZ

Q1) Describe the Overall Structure of the Dewey Decimal System.

The DDC is divided into 10 main classes, then 10 divisions, then 10 sections.

Q2) What is the purpose of the First, second and Third Summaries? When would you use them?

(ok, I am quoting the answer from the book for this one)

The 1st, 2nd and 3rd summaries list the main classes, divisions and sections with their headings. They are used to become familiar with the overall structure of the DDC, and to locate numbers which relate to each other. (I think the first reason is a bit of a stretch and not mentioned in the book!)

Q3) Why is the relative index so called?

Because it is an idex which relates like or related subjects. (So if a topic has several aspects, you can find the one best suited by looking at all the numbers)

Posted in Collection management., Library | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »