LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  December 2006

ARSCLIST December 2006

Subject:

Re: Digitizing libraries - OT comment

From:

Roger and Allison Kulp <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:41:25 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (93 lines)

Because it's the government,silly.They' re not supposed to do anything efficiently.

                             Roger Kulp


Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote: I'd be happy if the current LOC digital presence were more accessible to us taxpayers (ie owners). 
The searching online is just not anywhere near easy for a normal person. How come LOC can't contract 
with Google or someone to make the online search interface easier and quicker? Also, as far as I've 
experienced, there isn't a meta-search method, you have to find a specific collection and then 
search it and lord help you if you pick too vague a term. Bottom line, I'm college educated and 
pretty good at research and I've never had a lot of luck with any LOC website. I generally start 
with Google and find if the LOC is the only place to get it, ask my friend who works there to help 
me. As a taxpayer (ie owner) of the LOC, this makes me none too happy!

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jim Lindner" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Digitizing libraries - OT comment


> My understanding is that the NAVCC (when fully up and running at full  capacity) will in fact be 
> significantly larger then other  repositories that you mention. This was mentioned in passing by 
> several vendors who responded to the RFC for the acquisition of the  storage subsystem. I do not 
> know personally if that is true, but the  vendors responding were the players who would have been 
> in a position  to know that kind of information and I have no reason to doubt them.  The 
> repository for NAVCC is however very specialized due to the  mission - and there are many things 
> to look at with repositories on  the scale that we are discussing - access for example is an 
> important  area. Some repositories may be smaller in terms of the amount of TB's  stored, but may 
> have very large bandwidth requirements due to the  access requirements. Others may be much larger 
> but could essentially  be "dark" archives which collect information but have it only  accessed 
> infrequently - so which is "bigger" depends very much on how  you define your terms.
>
> An article on the NAVCC is located here.
> http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/06078/navcc.html
>
>
>
>
> Jim Lindner
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
>   Media Matters LLC.
>   SAMMA Systems LLC.
>   450 West 31st Street 4th Floor
>   New York, N.Y. 10001
>
> eFax (646) 349-4475
> Mobile: (917) 945-2662
> Office: (212) 268-5528
>
> www.media-matters.net
> Media Matters LLC. is a technical consultancy specializing in  archival audio and video material. 
> We provide advice and analysis, to  media archives that apply the beneficial advances in 
> technology to  collection management.
>
> www.sammasystems.com
> SAMMA Systems provides tools and products that implement and optimize  the advances in modern 
> technology with established media preservation  and access practices.
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2006, at 12:34 PM, Mike Richter wrote:
>
>> Jim Lindner wrote:
>>> This is a very interesting post, just one very quick comment. I  have been a consultant for the 
>>> Library of Congress for about 5  years now - and I can tell  you for sure - absolutely - that 
>>> those  quotations of space are just - well - silly. Since the library  does not even have a full 
>>> accounting of exactly how large the  collection is - and because it grows every minute 
>>> (literally)  these "estimates" really have absolutely no basis in fact. The  Libraries 
>>> collection includes many more types of objects then  books. And even if you just consider the 
>>> books - they are in many  different languages - and what about the pictures in the books?  There 
>>> are illuminated manuscripts. In the National Audio Visual  Conservation Center being built in 
>>> Culpeper Virginia, the estimate  is that many terabytes a day will be generated in the transfer 
>>> of  analog carriers.
>>
>> Once upon a time, I had clearance to ask what the traffic and  storage numbers were for NSA. 
>> Since I never asked, I may speculate  that it would make the LoC's efforts pale in comparison
>>
>> Mike
>> -- 
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.mrichter.com/
>>
> 


 
---------------------------------
Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager