Slashdot Mirror


Open Source Library Card-Catalog Apps?

dmd writes: "Does there exist Open Source software for maintaining a small to medium sized library card-catalog? It seems all the tools are available: a perl module for working with MARC records, several for working with Z39.50 and XML, and even a web site apparently devoted to nearly this exact topic. An actual, working, catalog, however, seems to be missing. Is this something that would be valuable? I, for one, have nearly 5k volumes in my collection, and they're begging for some discipline." I'm sure cash-strapped public libraries and schools would like to be able to use free / Free tools for this, since paper books aren't going away anytime soon. Not to mention for CDs, videos, charts, museum holdings ... any ideas out there? Turnkey solutions?

4 of 111 comments (clear)

  1. Input from a library geek. by dkh2 · · Score: 4
    Yes, by all means code it and make it fully Z39.50 and MARC compliant! However, there are other considerations you need to throw in.

    Commercially available library software that is actually used by libraries is much more than just a cataloging/look-up system to replace those old 3*5 cards.

    You need an acquisitions module that has the ability to do electronic ordering and approval plan processing.

    The search and report capabilities on the staff interface for these things is amazing. I can collect a list of all item records belonging to location X and created within [ range of dates ] that are attached to bibliographic records for [ material type ] within a [ call number range ], sort the records according to my criteria, then output selected fields from either the bib. or the item, or both, in the order I choose to the device of my choice (including print to e-mail or fax) and I haven't even begun to make the system sweat. Yes, this is a fairly straight forward thing to do (selecting records based on data spread across multiple related/linked records) in SQL but, you also need a front end that the end user can comprehend.

    If you're going to code it, it will need to be able to interact with all of the prevailing vendors... Ebsco, Baker & Taylor, Basil Blackwell, Swets & Zeitlinger, Matthews, etc... You will want tech contacts from each of these vendors to fine tune the ordering/receiving/approval interfaces.

    Finally, the amount of fiscal reporting done in libraries can boggle your mind. You would never suspect that something so seemingly simple could be so complicated. If you don't have the ability to generate financial reports you might as well go back to index cards and hand written ledgers.

    --
    My office has been taken over by iPod people.
  2. simpler and more complex than you'd think by dchud · · Score: 4
    There are about three problems here (hopefully they won't moderate me down for this cuz I work for oss4lib.org :). The simpler bits have to do with the mindset of librarians: liberal about access, conservative about library collections. Since an online card catalog is about the collection, we librarian types tend to forestall any major systems overhauls until the last possible moment. And our systems vendors only have about a $500M business to sell to, so the general mindshare remains rivalrous, proprietary, dedicated to supporting legacy apps, and lacking overflow of hacker talent. Thus our systems generally suck and few are willing to admit it out loud.

    Second is that half of the pieces that go into a big library management system (including the catalog part) are really generic business systems: EDI, invoicing, accounting, etc., but they haven't been abstracted out of the realm of our systems vendors. So the level of standards followed there is minimal so those modules generally don't interoperate with our trading partners (i.e. internal payment systems and external suppliers). Lots of redundant keying and more crappy systems to maintain there, all of which is typically deeply and proprietarily tied into the catalog data.

    All that said -- and to our vendors' credit they are tending to get better these days -- we've been sharing catalog data like hackers are sharing code for over 100 years. We've been doing it online for about 35 years, but the way we do it now is pretty much the same way we've been doing it for those 35 years. i.e. largely dependent on one of two .orgs/vendors to be a clearinghouse for sharing catalog data. But those folks disappear if they can't sell the data back to us after we create it for them. So nobody running a library wants them to disappear. Especially because we've got to handle one-of-a-kind rare items in big research libraries as well as unusual local items in public libraries and so on.

    Imho the solution is to first outsource all the standard business stuff to vendors+free software that can do the same job with existing standards-based tools. Then abstract away as much as possible of the catalog data into free references sources shared and maintained by the library community (think: you could run your own amazon.com recommendations site, etc.). This is what we're trying to do (shameless plug alert) with the jake project for journals. Same thing applies for books, although there are probably >=100M records to normalize.

    If we can get that done, then anybody could hack up a gtk+ front end to the free, shared catalog, and pick and choose the items you have yourselves. It would work sorta like dict.org or jake. Just imagine how much easier it will be to search for ebooks in gnutella once this is done... :)

  3. MARC tape issues - giving away your tax dollars by Mrs.+Rod · · Score: 4

    Your tax dollars paid for all the cataloging at the Library of Congress.

    Unfortunately, some years back the firm that records these records in the MARC formats legally got control not only of their formatted tapes, but of any use of the information used after extraction from these tapes. In other words, they not only own the format, but the government funded information contained in the format.

    This is critical because these MARC tapes are the primary source of library cataloging information for most libraries. There are some other independent networks, primarily of educational institutions in the western US, but most libraries depend on the Library of Congress OCLC tapes.

    The whole thing stinks, and is ridiculous. As a former librarian, who also holds a BSCS, I was outraged at this theft of public assets. The worst part was dealing with my moronic former colleagues who screamed that of course this company should own this information - it was "intellectual property." Thousands of librarians wrote letters in supporting this company's "intellectual property rights" to work created at tax payer expense.

    This happened because most librarians think that putting information into a data format is some mystical arcana mastered only by brilliant wizards. They do not realize that the far more difficult part of the operation was the original cataloging done by the awesome catalogers at the Library of Congress.

    So, libraries pay for the nose for software. First, the fee that the vendor has to pay for using the MARC tapes, the royalties for the actual use of the data contained on the tapes, and then for the library software itself. BTW, most library software is so atrocious, buggy, and difficult to use that it's writers would receive a failing grade if it had been turned in as a senior project at any half way reputable college.

  4. Yes, there is: Koha. by vaxer · · Score: 5
    The Koha Open Source Library System might be useful to you.

    Public libraries, unfortunately, are too often dependent on fiercely proprietary-minded vendors for their daily operations.

    Incidentally, the "go get MySQL, you dumbass" posters are missing an important point: libraries use the MARC data standard for catalog records, and SQL doesn't cope well with the kind of tricks MARC can do.