[Web4lib] One consequence of the digitization programs

[Frances, Melodie]

Actually the visual quality (or perhaps there is a different word for
it) does have some problems - 'd' and '4' are interchanged a LOT, and I
don't know what else - ask me for specifics if you want, but there are
some very simple words that aren't reading correctly. I also don't know
if there are any plans to fix this?

Melodie Morgan Frances
Head of Cataloging
Graduate Theological Union
mfrances at gtu.edu
510-649-2521

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Anders Ericson
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 8:59 AM
To: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: SV: [Web4lib] One consequence of the digitization programs

I'm not interested in visual quality, but the texts. The attitudes; the
biases of e.g. 19th century authors. Those that are more and more likely
to
pop up into our faces when searching the web. 

When someone is about to borrow a 3 years old book about the Iraqi war,
you
do inform her about the newer ones, don't you? 

ae

> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> Fra: Brian Gray [mailto:mindspiral at gmail.com]
> Sendt: 6. november 2007 17:35
> Til: Anders Ericson
> Kopi: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Emne: Re: [Web4lib] One consequence of the digitization programs
> 
> 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

_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/