[Web4lib] One consequence of the digitization programs

[Brian Gray]

Are you looking for information about the quality of the digitizations
or quality of the information available? It seems to me these are very
different.

You start off suggesting you are interested in the quality of the data
with the comment about the "often unreliable and false information".
But I do not see how Google's efforts are any different than what all
our libraries do already in form of collection policies, especially
since they are just using what libraries make available to them. Are
we not ourselves by levels of participation determining what goes
online? We do not identify in our catalogs now what is considered good
or bad information, so do we expect to hold Google-like projects to a
different expectation?

Or, are you specifically interested in the actual visual quality of the scans?

Brian Gray
mindspiral at gmail.com

On Nov 6, 2007 7:26 AM, Anders Ericson
<anders.ericson at norskbibliotekforening.no> wrote:
> Libraries and others do a lot of digitization these days. But one of the
> (unintended) consequences is an increasing amount of very easily available
> texts in Google - however old and often unreliable and false information.
> (Not unlike the new, but you get my point?)
>
> I'm looking for digitization efforts that include some "consumer's
> information" on the quality of digitized documents. Like links to Wikipedia
> articles or librarians' input.
>
>
> Anders Ericson,
> Web editor, Norwegian Libr. Assoc.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>



-- 
Brian Gray
mindspiral at gmail.com