Essential skills and knowledge for troubleshooting e-resources access issues in a webscale discovery environment Web-scale discovery indexes are now a well-established part of many libraries' suites of

Documentation of local policies, workflows, and procedures is an important activity for cataloging and metadata units. But creating and maintaining documentation is a huge task that is not always a high priority. Librarians at the University of Minnesota Libraries planned a documentation hackathon, CatDoc HackDoc, with three primary goals: to update a large amount of documentation quickly, to apply accessibility best practices to all documentation, and to bring new staff into the documentation workflow. This article describes the event's planning process, structure, and outcomes, and offers guidance on how others can adapt the CatDoc HackDoc model in their own organizations. transitions, both by increasing staff confidence and improving process efficiency. When good documentation is in place, new staff members should not have to "reverse engineer" procedural steps or invent (and document) an entirely new procedure where a previously undocumented one had been in place.Another critical function of documentation is to encourage consistency of practice. This is especially true when more than one staff member is responsible for the same or similar cataloging and metadata tasks. Staff who began working for the library at different times may have learned their jobs under different standards and practices or may have learned their jobs under different supervisors or lead workers. As job responsibilities, metadata standards, and library systems all change over time, it is challenging to keep everyone "on the same page." Ongoing attention paid to documentation can help alleviate this problem. 1 Accurate, up-to-date documentation is also a valuable tool for data analysis. Five decades after the invention of MARC, and 30-40 years after many libraries implemented their first integrated library system, the need for documentation showing how library data practices have changed over time is acute and growing. Thoughtfully maintained documentation can explain puzzling elements in legacy data, help identify areas for data remediation, and serve as an informal registry or key for analysis projects drawing on library metadata. Whatever the rationale for prioritizing documentation, it is important to think of documentation as an ongoing process, rather than as a project with a clearly defined endpoint. Good documentation has a lifecycle. The components of the documentation lifecycle may vary slightly, but a simple lifecycle might include drafting, publishing,

213 Notes on Operations As e-book batchloading workloads have increased, the quality of vendor-provided MARC records has emerged as a major concern for libraries. This paper discusses a study of record quality in e-A s libraries expand their electronic collections, many find that the most effective and practical means of providing catalog access to these collections is through batchloading MARC records provided by vendors or publishers into local catalogs. As batchloading becomes more common and libraries share their experiences, certain themes and focuses of discussion have emerged. One is the challenge of incorporating batchloading into existing technical services and systems workflows. Another is navigating the mechanics of record editing and loading processes. A third strand running throughout the batchloading literature is the issue of record quality. General discussions of the topic usually include a least a brief discussion of concerns about record quality, and most case studies of batchloading projects identify multiple quality issues found and addressed as part of the project.At the University of Minnesota Libraries (UML), experiences have been much the same as those at other institutions. Librarians learned how to manipulate MARC records in batch and determined how to train staff and design workflows to accommodate batchloading. However, poor record quality continued to trouble catalog and authority control librarians. Years of providing feedback on record quality to vendors had yielded mostly discouraging results. Although librarians had largely mastered the processes for correcting certain kinds of critical problems, dramatic increases in batchloading work indicated a strong need to develop more efficient and systematic batch editing processes. To that end, technical services managers charged a small group of two catalogers and one systems Stacie Traill (trail001@umn.edu) is Cartographic and Electronic Resources Cataloger,

Cataloging ethics have received significant attention in recent years, notably via a series of events and discussions held under the umbrella of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS) Cataloging and Metadata Management Section (CaMMS) exploring the potential development of a code of cataloging ethics. At the same time, the “critlib” (critical librarianship) movement has grown, creating both virtual and physical spaces for exploring social justice principles in the context of library work. Catalogers have initiated conversations about social justice in metadata work under the “critcat” banner. The publication of Ethical Questions in Name Authority Control is timely in this environment, where both ethics and social justice are leading concerns for many catalogers and metadata professionals.

Cataloging has seen substantial change since 2000, and the cataloging of maps, geospatial data, and other cartographic resources is no exception. The pace and scale of change, tied to the evolution of technology and cataloging/metadata standards, have been swift and broad. This paper highlights the most important changes and trends in the cataloging of cartographic resources during the first thirteen years of the twenty-first century through a review of the published literature, and summarizes the state of map cataloging today. The author concludes the paper by proposing future directions for research and practice.