OCLC number

Unless I'm overlooking things, manually imported books don't show a "find in a library" link. But for most of my manually imported books I copied the data from WorldCat. I guess that link could be enabled with an OCLC number in the database and manual import form.

Perhaps you can post some examples, as far as I knew Worldcat was ISBN based, at least that's how LibraryThing builds the link. I clicked a few of your catalogue items, and the link shows up fine, however I don't know which are manually entered or not.

Edit: on checking some more of your catalogue items - e.g. http://www.librarything.com/work/2475364&book=12000837 , if you view the Book Information - you have no ISBN's entered - hence the Find in a Library Worldcat links don't show up.

You'll probably find if you enter the ISBN into your copy the link will then show up.

You're right, my analysis missed a detail. It is the lack of ISBN and not the manual entry. So my wish reduces to the ISBN-less books.

Your example is a periodical and thus has an ISSN in stead of an ISBN, like the kantbrief.

Other examples of books without ISBN but in WorldCat
Kant uit Vlaanderen en 's Gravenmoer
Kant met een zilveren randje, the touch stone didn't work on this one.
An almost one:
lace express

Well, without an ISBN LibraryThing can't generate a direct link to WorldCat details for that book, so any non-ISBN books are left out in the cold at present.

Perhaps it could drop down to a WorldCat keyword search if no ISBN exists, but results could be inaccurate and wouldn't take you direct to the full details, you'd wind up at a WC search results page.

Seems a technical issue to me. In message 3 I used touchstones and LT-links. below are the permanent WorldCat links:

Kant Kwartaal
kantbrief
Kant uit Vlaanderen en 's Gravenmoer
Kant met een zilveren randje

Wow...
Message 1 today 12:57am
Message 2 today 1:02am

PS on 5
I mean, if the LT would store the OCLC number it could create the link.

<rant>So, usually we're open about stuff, but I'll be straight:
There is no way LibraryThing will ever enable cataloging from WorldCat.

*WorldCat's terms explicitly forbids using them for cataloging. If you want to catalog from OCLC, you pay (or have data valuable enough to offset that).
*I'm not letting any more proprietary, paid numbering systems muck up our data.
*WorldCat has refused to let us access their Z39.50 servers.
*If OCLC had it's wishes, there would be no open Z39.50 servers, such as LT uses. They weaken OCLC's control over high-quality library data. For starters, by facilitating free cataloging by small libraries, LibraryThing is a threat to OCLC's low-end products.

In every way we can, LibraryThing has and will continue to support free and open access to basic bibliographic data. I believe in it strongly, and it's also good for LibraryThing. Fortunately, things are moving that way—and quickly.>rant<

I don't mean to import data from WorldCat into LT. I'm talking about the "find in a library" link. What's the difference when that link specifies an OCLC number if no ISBN is available? Am I violating any terms of service in message 5?

Ok, good point. As you can tell, the whole OCLC thing gets me.

I don't want to store OCLC numbers, even if the catalog LibraryThing queries has them. But I just pushed forward a system to enable links to FIL based on title and author.

It seems to work, although Worldcat searches are all failing today. And Dutch holdings are not impressive.

If it gets you, it might be about time to put it explicitly in a FAQ and close by requests for open Z39.50 servers.

> 10

Had some trouble deciphering your message. "holding" is still puzzling me, too little librenglish in my luggage.

The solution however is working fine. Thanks.

Holdings are items/works held by a Library. For example, a Library may have 3 copies of the same book, each copy is a holding.

Yeah, I'd like to know why my book-edit page allows me to post ISBN numbers, LOC numbers, etc., but there's no place to enter an OCLC number even if I know it.

Academic theses and dissertations, for example, have OCLC numbers but don't typically have ISBN numbers.

Last month at a bibliophile society meeting I was describing LibraryThing to a librarian at our table. As a librarian responsible for evaluating collections offered for donation, she stressed the desirability of having OCLC numbers available as a means of determining how common a given item is in major institutional collections. It is easier to get funding to buy a library (when that is done) if a significant portion of the books are unique or uncommon in OCLC/WorldCat.

This is more of a factor in old works that do not have ISBNs of course.

I realize that the relationship between LT and OCLC is a contentious one over data usage permissions and more recently Tim has expressed a sentiment along the lines of what is seen in #8, #10 here so I don't think the position has changed.

Probably the thing to do, if you think it important for your collection, is to do a manual search on WorldCat and save the Permalink in the Private Comments field for your copy. I don't know if this will be converted to a hypertext link, however, just because it looks like

http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/30526726

The above example is a book in my collection that exists in only one other copy in the library world represented by WorldCat/OCLC. That makes it interesting to me and possibly other people.

So, what I take from this is that LT has no desire or ability to pull data from OCLC/WorldCat because the latter has been unhelpful in allowing access without significant fees, restrictions, etc. Nonetheless, for those collectors (and institutions) who wish to record this information, there should be a designated place for it with the same status as the ISBN, LCCN, and other identifying numbers. It should be sortable and part of an export. Otherwise we have to try to put it in Comments or Private Comments.

A related area concerns links to equivalent eBook copies from Google Books, Archive.org, and Project Gutenberg. Shall these remain in the Comments and Private Comments?

James

Thanks for the note. We do actually keep track of OCLC numbers. So we should display them too. It's not urgent, but I'll add it to my list of things to do.