1

On the RecordReport of theLibrary of Congress Working Group on the Future ofBibliographic Control

Diane BoehrHead of Cataloging, NLMboehrd@mail.nlm.nih.govFor MLA Annual MeetingMay 20, 2008

Background

The Working Group was charged to:Present findings on how bibliographic control

and other descriptive practices can effectively support management of and access to library materials in the evolving information and technology environment;

Recommend ways in which the library community can collectively move toward achieving this vision;

Advise the Library of Congress on its role and priorities.

2

The Process Three public hearings, March–July

2007:○ Users and uses of bibliographic data (held at

Google headquarters, San Jose)○ Structures and standards for bibliographic

control (held at ALA headquarters, Chicago)○ Economics and organization of bibliographic

control (held at LC, Washington, DC)Draft report issued Nov. 30, 2007

○ Two weeks for public commentsFinal report issued Jan. 9, 2008

3

The Audience for the Report

4

LC

Current and potential participants in the bibliographic sphere

Policy makers and decision makers who influence the scope of operations and constraints upon participating organizations.

The Working Group’s Vision of the Future

The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based

5

Working Group’s Guiding Principles

Redefine bibliographic control

Redefine the bibliographic universe

Redefine the role of the Library of Congress

6

High level recommendations

1. Increase the Efficiency of Bibliographic Record Production and Maintenance

2. Enhance Access to Rare, Unique, and Other Special Hidden Materials

3. Position our Technology for the Future4. Position our Community for the Future5. Strengthen the Library and Information

Science Profession

7

8

1. Increase efficiencies

Eliminate Redundancies Make use of bibliographic data

available earlier in the supply chain

Re-purpose existing metadata for greater efficiency

Fully automate the CIP process

9

1. Increase efficiencies (con’t.)

Distribute responsibility Share responsibility for creating and

maintaining bibliographic recordsCollaborate on authority record

creation and maintenanceIncrease re-use of assigned

authoritative headings among various communities

Internationalize authority files

10

1. Increase efficiencies (con’t.)

Economics Re-examine current economic

model for data sharing in the networked environment

Increase incentives for sharing bibliographic records

11

2. Enhance Access to Hidden Collections

Make the discovery of rare & unique materials a high priority

Provide some level of access to all material, rather than comprehensive access to some material and no access at all to other material

Encourage digitization to allow broad access

Share access to unique materials

12

3. Position Technology for the Future

Web as Infrastructure

Develop a more flexible, extensible metadata carrier

Express library standards as well as library data in machine- readable and machine-actionable formats

Extend use of standard identifiers

13

3. Position Technology for the Future (con’t)

Standards Development Improve the standards

development processDevelop standards with a focus on

return of investmentIncorporate testing and

implementation plans as integral parts of the development process

14

3. Position Technology for the Future (con’t.)

Suspend further new work on RDA

The promised benefits of RDA are not discernable in the drafts seen to date

Business case for moving to RDA has not been made satisfactorily, particularly given the potential costs of adoption

More real-world testing of the FRBR model, on which RDA is based, is needed

15

4. Position our Community for the Future

Design for the future Integrate user-contributed data, while

maintaining the integrity of the library-created data

Provide links to appropriate external dataMore research into use of computationally

derived dataClarify and further explore the use of the

FRBR model in the Web environment

16

4. Position our Community for the Future (con’t.)

LCSH Evolve & transform LCSHPursue de-coupling of subject

strings Encourage application of & cross-

referencing with other controlled subject vocabularies

Recognize the potential of computational indexing in the practice of subject analysis

17

5. Strengthen the Profession

Build an evidence base Encourage ongoing qualitative and

quantitative research in bibliographic control

Design LIS education to meet present and future needs

18

In Summary

Report presents a vision and broad directions for the future

It is not a specific implementation plan

A call to action

19

20

LC’s Response

Three separate groups in the library reviewed the document

LC has committed to responding in writing to each of the separate recommendations by ALA Annual, June 2008

Impact on NLM?

Cataloging descriptive process could be streamlined

Catalogers could focus on the intellectual tasks of subject assignment, classification, and linkages between items

More of NLM’s cataloging resources could be devoted to providing access to our hidden collections

21

Other things NLM could do

Work with Lister Hill to develop automated means of disambiguating authors

Work with publishers to assist in developing author identifiers

Use authorized name headings in indexing citations as well as in bibliographic records

22

Other things NLM could do

Work cooperatively with LC to develop crosswalks between MeSH and LCSH

Investigate the possibility of user tagging for bibliographic citations. Review the tags to enhance the MeSH vocabulary and/or PubMed mappings

23

Access the Working Group’s Report

24

http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/