HomeGroupsTalkZeitgeist
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.
  • LibraryThing
  • Book discussions
  • Your LibraryThing
  • Join to start using.

Harvard metadata now searchable via OverCat!

New features

Join LibraryThing to post.

This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.

1jbd1
May 15, 2012, 1:21pm Top

See the blog post for details, but the short version is that 12.3 million MARC records from Harvard are now included in OverCat searches (bringing total OverCat coverage to more than 50 million records!)

2Nicole_VanK
May 15, 2012, 1:23pm Top

Sweet!

3timspalding
May 15, 2012, 1:32pm Top

Processing the records took more than a week. It was like eating an elephant!

4anglemark
May 15, 2012, 1:33pm Top

Yay!

(I saw the tweet about Harvard records being added and thought here come the vinyls! ;)

5lilithcat
May 15, 2012, 1:36pm Top

6steve.clason
May 15, 2012, 3:08pm Top

Thanks to Harvard for releasing it and to you at LT for importing that data into OverCat. I'm sure it was fun in a programmer/librarian geekish sort of way and I'm also sure it was a lot of work and I know for a dead-certain fact we all just received a substantial benefit.

7justjim
May 15, 2012, 9:11pm Top

>5 lilithcat: One never sees an elephant's foot at the supermarket any more!

8elenchus
May 15, 2012, 9:28pm Top

I'm really geeked at the addition of more academic titles, as alluded to in the blog post.

Curious: what odds does the LT Hive Mind put on Harvard's decision being a spur to other libraries and/or a shift in OCLC policy? I assume there is more to this opening gambit but I'm not in the game.

9timspalding
May 15, 2012, 9:33pm Top

>8 elenchus:

I think Harvard was pushed by a number of very copyleftish people there—David Weinberger and John Palfrey, especially. They also knew that OCLC wasn't going to throw them of the cooperative or sue them. Harvard leaving would be a serious blow, and could be the nucleus of a real competitor. So they bit their tongue. The trick is whether it breaks the dam, and others do it too.

10brightcopy
May 15, 2012, 9:35pm Top

This REALLY makes me wish for a "retarget" mode for my books. To be able to take an existing book and switch it from a less desirable data source (amazon) to a more desirable one (Harvard via Overcat) without having to redo all my collections, tags, reading dates, comments, etc.

11timspalding
May 15, 2012, 9:36pm Top

We're working on it. Chris Catalfo is now 50% on the adding books project.

T

12brightcopy
Edited: May 15, 2012, 9:58pm Top

Good to hear. Wait... you've been talking about this redo since before I signed up for LT. 50% done ... crap!

:D

(Of course, you probably meant he's spending 50% of his time on it. I'm still leaving my comment up because it made me smile while writing it. It's also good to hear it will be more than just add books but will also include a "retarget" function. That is what I heard, right?)

13timspalding
May 15, 2012, 10:08pm Top

Yeah, I know.

Yeah, he's spending 50% of his time on it. You'd have liked to be in today's conversation. I said "go! go! go!" Our sysadmin, Brian, said "you're going to kill the box!"

14brightcopy
May 15, 2012, 10:36pm Top

Sysadmins ALWAYS say that. :D

15Katya0133
May 16, 2012, 10:40am Top

Wooohooo! I'll almost certainly make use of these records next time I'm working on Pushkin (probably this weekend).

16cbaksik
May 16, 2012, 11:54am Top

Happy to hear the enthusiasm around this.

Corinna Baksik
Systems Librarian, Harvard University

17brightcopy
May 16, 2012, 12:20pm Top

Thanks for being a part of it!

Tim - As part of this add books redo, it'd be nice if we could prioritize certain OverCat sub-sources. For example, making it such that when there's several page of results for a search, I could make the Harvard data come first.

Right now, there's a bit of a gap between "search only one source" and "search overcat but get all the results jumbled together". And, of course, there's no way to "search only one source" for the Harvard data since it's not a standalone source.

The jumbled nature of the results reduces the value of OverCat a bit in general, I'm afraid. I'd love if the new add books to do a much better job of letting me search once and then pick the one I want, rather than having to do all clicking and re-searching manually.

18timspalding
May 16, 2012, 12:37pm Top

>17 brightcopy:

Yes, I think that's a decent idea. Right now we prioritize the record that's, basically, had the most edits. Usually that's the best. Not always.

One thing we're going to do is separate add books into a super-simple and an expert search. That'll allow us to go crazy with options, without going crazy.

19lorax
May 16, 2012, 1:04pm Top

One thing we're going to do is separate add books into a super-simple and an expert search.

That's fantastic! To be honest I had been a little worried that the redo was going to simplify things for the reading-list userbase at the expense of the cataloging userbase; glad to see that won't be the case.

20brightcopy
May 16, 2012, 1:10pm Top

Yeah, sounds promising.

Group: New features

45,201 messages

This group does not accept members.

About

This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.

Touchstones

No touchstones

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 134,184,276 books! | Top bar: Always visible