What's so different about the net?

[Carlos I McEvilly]

I think the burden is on Paul Neff to tell us why the
Internet is not a new paradigm for librarians.  In the
meantime, here are some ways the net is different with
respect to cataloging:

1) Question of catalog's usefulness -- if we users can
   get directly at an item through a variety of methods,
   including traditional as well as emerging kinds of
   access points, why should we want to go through an
   itermediary step of accessing a catalog entry?  We do
   not want the catalog entry; we want the actual item.
   Catalogs were useful when books had to be stored in a
   different location from the access point that helped
   locate the book.  What we need for online resources,
   in my opinion, are directories and subject guides --
   that lead directly to the item, not to a catalog entry.
   Subtle difference, but a fundamental one.  (What basis
   do you have for assuming that the catalog you build is
   going to be used?)

2) The "What is a document?" problem -- OCLC in its sample
   WWW catalog entries appears to be only cataloging main
   pages, not sub-pages.  But what is a  main page?  Who 
   decides what is THE main page for a site?  Further on
   this problem, is a document always its whole self if
   the hyperlinks it points to have gone away?  Are you 
   sure?  What about documents that are composed entirely
   of other documents, assembled on the fly?  This is not
   just angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin stuff; these are
   realities of the current Web.  How about multimedia:
   is a video a catalogable item?  How about a 5-second
   video with no title, author, date, publisher, or
   discernable topic?  Where do you draw the line between
   what can or should be cataloged and what cannot or
   should not be?  As time passes this question is
   getting more difficult, not easier, to sort out.  Even
   laying aside multimedia items, text items are also
   often poorly defined on the net.  Not so with books.
   Which leads to:

3) Ephemeral nature of material -- cataloged today, gone
   tomorrow.  Not only does material disappear and move,
   it also evolves and sometimes even changes drastically.
   How can you catalog something that doesn't have a set
   identity, date, or version number?  Many web resources
   are of this nature, but they do not necessarily proclaim
   this fact with any aspect of their appearance.  Books,
   on the other hand, almost always come with built in 
   clues about their publishing status, are real things
   rooted in a physical embodiment, and do not change as
   often and unpredictably as online documents.

4) Competition from non-librarians for the task of 
   organizing, and helping users find, information -- this
   is real on the net, and not to be underestimated.  The
   people doing it are competent, and they are highly
   motivated to do it better and better with each passing
   month.

This whole question reminds me of the people who every
year have to be pulled out of the 13,000 foot high New
Mexico mountains after they set out unprepared for a high-
altitude hike.  The standard assumption is "I'm an
experienced hiker -- I'm in good shape... how can these
mountains be any different from the ones back home?"
Not being able to breathe can indeed be a new paradigm
for even experienced hikers.  I'm not saying the analogy
fits entirely -- but it seems there are a lot of
unfounded assumptions being made here, and danger lurks.

Carlos McEvilly
cim at lanl.gov