Computer Cataloguing in Retrospect

One of the benefits of the academic life over most other occupations, is that you are, of necessity, a user of many different libraries. Much of my research time over the last year has been spent moderating focus groups, conducting an e-mail questionnaire, analysing and writing up the results. Whilst this was both interesting and productive it is not really satisfying. For me, ‘real’ research inevitably involves the consultation of books and manuscripts, in ‘real,’ as opposed to ‘virtual’, libraries. The summer vacations do at least provide the opportunity to get down to such research, although increasingly they are eaten into by various study schools, examination boards, academic meetings, preparations for the next academic year, supervision of postgraduates, and perhaps even a brief holiday.

The small town of Aberystwyth, where I live and work, probably has more library books per head of population than anywhere else, and I am often pleasantly surprised by what is available for consultation in the National Library of Wales or in the collections of the various academic institutions within the town. Inevitably there are times when I have to locate material elsewhere, either so it may be borrowed on my behalf, or, more likely, so that I may plan trips to research libraries in London, or Oxford. In this respect, there have been enormous advances for me over the last decade. From my desk at work, or from my study at home, I am now able to consult the catalogues of the National Library and my own university, together with a host of other on-line or CD-ROM catalogues throughout the UK and indeed the whole World. These computerised catalogues are also becoming increasingly sophisticated and provide more than the barest bibliographical detail. They not only provide the traditional limited access points of author, title and subject, but usually enable me to identify materials from incomplete titles or inaccurate references, or else to locate associated or contemporary items in ways that have never been possible before. Even the most blinkered and techno-phobic library users can no longer deny the enormous benefits to scholarship that have accrued through the advent of computerised catalogues available over the networks, such as the British Library OPAC or the National Register of Archives.

One of the problems associated with the automation of large scale record keeping processes over the last forty years  has been that the technologies available have not stood still. There has been no opportunity to apply them retrospectively in a coherent and standardised manner before new developments are introduced. Thus many large libraries have brilliant new systems for acquiring catalogue records for their current and recent acquisitions, but are also stuck with earlier sequences of records on microfiche or in some hard-copy format. Other specialised collections are so small and lacking in resources that they have never been catalogued to professional standards or in a format that makes them accessible outside their parent institutions. Yet within these ‘under-catalogued’ collections are materials that are not readily available elsewhere, and which would be of considerable benefit to the whole library community, if only their existence were known

For example, if I want to be certain that a fifty-year-old title is not available in Aberystwyth I have to check a whole series of different catalogues, in addition to the OPACs which I can consult from my desk. Thus there are two microfiche sequences in the National Library one produced by COM which acts as a backup to the OPAC, and the other produced by microfilming the original catalogue cards. In addition there is another irritating small sequence of entries which did not reproduce well in the initial microfilming of the card catalogue). I would then have to check the remaining card catalogue entries of the former College of Librarianship, the Welsh Agricultural College, and the University College of Wales (which were once independent institutions but now are constituent parts of the Information Services of the University of Wales Aberystwyth). Depending upon the subject matter of the work I am seeking, it might then be worthwhile to check the stock of the local public library service, or a special library such as the Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research. I am also aware of various other stand alone databases or card files listing varieties of non-book materials such as videos, library plans, press cuttings, all of which might be of potential relevance to my work. This kind of problem would be repeated in libraries in every town and city within the British Isles, frequently on a somewhat larger scale. Britain has some of the richest and most important library collections in the world, particularly with respect to older materials, and yet frequently these resources are neglected and under-used.

Although we are now within sight of the goal of universally available on-line catalogue records, for UK libraries we are not quite there yet. The technology necessary for the efficient compilation and provision of massive bibliographic databases accessible by users has been developed. Undoubtedly there will be new and improved searching algorithms and new and more intuitive user interfaces developed, but the underlying software is now well established. Likewise the networking infrastructure is largely in place, at least for the academic communities in most developed countries. The same is not yet true for other libraries in the UK, but Project EARL (Electronic Access to Resources in Libraries) aims to make the advantages of the Internet available to all library users and is providing a frame­work for partnerships within the public and private sectors. The acceptance and gradual adoption of common standards for information retrieval, such as the ANSI/NISO Z39.50 protocol, will improve matters still further by standardising means of access across databases thereby allowing for the searching of multiple catalogues simultaneously. However, where most work still needs to be done is in the relatively low-tech conversion of existing catalogue records into a machine readable form, a task that has been proceeding fitfully for more than two decades.

Ten years ago, Derek Law wrote in this journal that the task of retrospective cataloguing was ‘measurable, finite, and capable of resolution, if only funds were available to libraries’ (Law, 1988). The ensuing decade has seen enormous technological advances which have enhanced the benefits of machine readable catalogues, and yet there has been relatively limited progress towards completing the task. There have been some important international co-operative projects, such as the prodigious growth of the OCLC WorldCat database, or the admirable progress that has been made towards the unified record of early printed books, with the advent of the English Short-Title Catalogue. But there remain enormous gaps both in the British bibliographical record, and more particularly in our record of holdings of titles. In the UK alone there are estimated to be about 50 million catalogue records which require conversion into a machine readable form.

There have been two recent studies into the logistical and financial issues of a programme of retrospective cataloguing. These were undertaken by a group of specialists with extensive experience including Philip Bryant, formerly of the UK Office of Library Networking, Barry Bloomfield, formerly the British Library’s Director of Collection Development, and Bernard Naylor the Librarian of the University of Southampton. The first of these studies covered the Higher Education sector and was commissioned as part of the Follett review during 1995. However whilst British academic libraries hold some 28 million ‘under-catalogued’ items (representing about six million titles), this is only part of the overall problem. Thus in 1996 the British Library Research and Innovations Centre financed a complementary study covering other types of library. Public library authorities, are believed to have about twelve million records awaiting conversion, although due to the large number of local studies collections involved, this figure includes a somewhat higher proportion of individual titles - perhaps as many of 6.5 million. Likewise a further ten million un-catalogued, and ‘under-catalogued’ items (representing 6 million titles) exist in a wide range of special libraries some of which are extremely small, but which nevertheless might contain unique materials (Making the most of our libraries: Library catalogue access: the issues and the opportunity 1997).

The cost of converting an existing record can be anything between £1.00 and £5.00, with a mean somewhere between £1.50 and £2.00, resulting in the requirement for a total of between £80 and £100 million. The sums involved are substantial, and would be distributed among many  different libraries, including those which are struggling to keep pace with their everyday commitments of acquiring, recording, and making available new materials. Some might argue that the money might be much better spent in improving access to new library materials such as CD-ROMs, videos etc. rather than wasting resources on older and little used book collections. But these kinds of comparison are invidious, for what is of vital importance to one scholar is of no interest to another. If materials are worth preserving, then they should be recorded in such a way that their whereabouts is known. All that can be said is that retrospective catalogue conversion is a ‘one-off’ cost, which will ultimately result in savings in staff time and effort in the libraries concerned, and will also convey tangible benefits to the library community as a whole.

The reports of these studies (which have recently been published and mounted on the World-Wide Web) did not merely look at the scale of the problem and likely costs, but also addressed issues such as the complexity of the task, the potential benefits of its resolution, and the requirements for skilled cataloguing staff. (Bryant, 1997). Above all, the authors highlight the need for a co-ordinated national programme to complete the task of retrospective catalogue conversion, over a five-year period rather continue with the desultory and piecemeal progress that has been made over the last decade. To this end a strategic statement was drawn up by the authors on behalf of the British Library,  for discussion with interested parties (Making the most of our libraries: Library catalogue access: the issues and the opportunity 1997).

One important unresolved issue concerns the responsibility for the implementation of such a programme. There is an obvious need for some form of co-ordinating body, which would establish the catalogues to be converted, set priorities for the work, ensure the requisite cataloguing standards were being maintained, and arrange collaborative programmes between neighbouring or otherwise related institutions.  Whether such a responsibility would fall within the remit of the Library and Information Commission, the British Library itself, the Library Association or some other body reflecting the diverse interests of the UK library community at large, has not been resolved.

The co-ordinating body, if it is established, would undoubtedly take a large part in raising the necessary finance for such a programme, since few libraries would be able to raise the sums involved from their revenue budgets. One answer might be a collaborative bid to one or more funding agencies to provide matching funds which would thereby ease the burden on individual libraries. One problem in this respect would be that the project would not be confined to one sector, and therefore does not fall within the remit of any one of the traditional funding agencies. The most likely source may therefore be an application to the Heritage Lottery Fund. The Library Association’s recent bid to the Millennium Fund for funds to complete the networking of public libraries may not have been successful, but nevertheless demonstrated the potential for funding large scale collaborative projects.

As mentioned above, providing network access to catalogue records of hitherto under-used materials will inevitably have the desirable effect of encouraging their use, by individuals who had no idea they existed. Thus any national cataloguing programme would have to ensure that the materials so recorded were being made freely available to users according to agreed criteria and subject to legitimate safeguards. There may be issues of preservation brought about by increased use, although past experience has tended to show that the greatest threat to special collections is the neglect brought about by ignorance of their potential value.

The two studies under discussion have highlighted both the costs and the benefits of a co-ordinated programme of retrospective catalogue conversion, and outlined a possible modus operandi, but does not provide any guarantees that such a project will be established. Indeed it will be a difficult task to secure both the funding and required co-operation across many different library sectors. It is for the library community as a whole (including both custodians and users) to decide whether it wishes to proceed with such a task at this time.

Previous generations had faith in the idea of the library, and invested a great deal into the establishment and building up of collections of all kinds. If we believe (as I do) that the printed book has a useful future in our society well into the next millennium, then we owe it to succeeding generations, to make the necessary investment to enable them to make the most of our libraries.

David Stoker

August 1997

References

Bryant, Philip. (1997) Making the most of our libraries: the report of two studies on retrospective conversion of library catalogues in the United Kingdom, with recommendations for a national strategy. British Library Research and Innovation Report 53). BLRIC. http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/services/papers/bl/blri053/

Law, Derek (1988) ‘The state of retroconversion in the United Kingdom: a view’, Journal of Librarianship, 20. pp.81-93.

Making the most of our libraries: Library catalogue access: the issues and the opportunity (1997) British Library Board.