If you do a book lookup in Google Book Search, at the bottom of the search results you will see a link for find libraries, which then passes your book search to Worldcatlibraries.org. Kinda neat concept, although I would like it more integrated into the results.
Link:
http://www.informationweek.com/software/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=192300460
On a side note:
This got me thinking, what if a library added it's books into Google base with Google ads. A library could get ad money and have a very searchable book index... |
For a librarian view (my own), I have numerous comments and examples here:
http://www.resourceshelf.com/2006/08/25/google-adds-library-search-to-book-search-thoughts-issues-questions/
Re: Google Base.
Yes, possible and I wouldn't doubt we will see some libraries try it. Interesting point.
But don't forget library catalogs (OPACS: online public access catalogs offer more (for users and librarians) than Google Base. Librarians also use modules hooked into these databaes for cataloging circulation, payments, ordering, etc. Plus, they offer much more powerful searching options. Heck, some even allow you to virtually browse their collections just like walking to a specific part of the collection and looked at how the books were arranged in the stacks. Many will also tell you if the item is physically in the library at the specific moment and if not, put the item on reserve.
What many libraries are now doing is merging book results with full text articles they license from various vendors. Often referred to as federated search. Users can select from various databases or use pre-built catagories. As I've said numerous times these full text articles are available free (24x7 from home or office) if you have a library card.
http://www.betanews.com/article/Finding_Answers_Beyond_Web_Search/111824..
NateDawg, if you contact me (off-list, via email, see ResourceShelf.com) I can help you get set-up with these databases.
Btw, in 2004, OCLC gave Google and Yahoo began a pilot to crawl their entire database and add those listings into the main web results. After the pilot (a few million records), we have heard little about how many additional records were actually crawled and just as important, maintaine and added to the main index. Right now the main index shows
(and we know these are just guesstimates) Google shows about 3.5 million and shows Yahoo 7 million. Whatever the case, two years later, both are a small portions of a much much larger dbase.
See:
http://www.infotoday.com/newsbreaks/nb041011-2.shtml
I think one of the reasons OCLC launched their own site (beta; http://www.worldcat.org) was to help solve this issue and another issue, where the results fall on a web results page. If they aren't in the top 10, forget it. Sure, there are tools and methods site: for example to limit to just these records, the typical user (not a GB reader) won't know how or take the time to use.
97-98% of the searches that go through any large web engine take zero advantage of any of the advanced search features. Sad.
Finally, an issue that needs (and likely will be addressed from OCLC) is that many of the libraries listed in Worldcat.org are NOT open to the general public. For example, I just did a search and 8 of the 10 libraries listed are not open to me or any member of the public. For example, one of the libraries listed is the Library of Congress which is opento the public (and a must stop when visiting D.C.) but doesn't lend materials directly to the public. It's considered a "source of last resort" that libraries can tap via interlibrary services. Telling people that a library has a book but they can't get to it is confusing for many. Another library listed is only open to students and faculty of a nearby university.
Also, as a friend reminded of yesterday, not every library participates in Worldcat. |
