Talk:Online public access catalog

Libraries High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

xx[edit]

OCLC WorldCat is not an OPAC insofar as it is NOT a "public access" database--it's a subscription database accessible to librarians working in libraries, who download shared bibliographic records into their *local* OPAC *from* OCLC WorldCat (or MARCive). The general public is not allowed to search OCLC WorldCat directly--so it is technically incorrect to identify it as an example of an OPAC. -jjr

fixed it. -jjr

_____________________

I have added screenshots of OPAC's I a have used. Could someone find out what company designed the OPAC which is used in Vyners School (the program has no about box) -RaviC

General Article Info[edit]

Who uses the term 'iPac'? I've never seen that term used anywhere to describe a web-based catalog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.17.79 (talk) 23:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is most of the information in this article related to OCLC Worldcat? As mentioned previously, WorldCat is not an OPAC. Its function is more on the cataloging side of an ILS than it is on the OPAC end. ScottW 15:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The more I look at the article, the more I think it needs a general reorganization. Aside from focusing on WorldCat, the article doesn't describe much about modern OPACs. Also, list of Vendors is little more than link spam. Any thoughts on a reorganization and rewrite? ScottW 15:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, given that there were no objections in the last four months, I've removed the list of OPAC vendors and the OCLC World Cat information. I've added a brief paragraph about the range of functionality in an OPAC. If I get time I'm going to try to add some referenced information in here (seems like a library-related article should have references). I'm pretty slow though, so feel free to get started without me. ScottW 18:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LIBSYS[edit]

LIBSYS

Fair use rationale for Image:Hillwebgeoac.PNG[edit]

Image:Hillwebgeoac.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

additions[edit]

For titles using non-Latin characters the OPAC systems are using transliteration, most adopted the transliteration rules of the Library of Congress see [1].
Best regards
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 23:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recovering info before the rewrite by 76.176.121.154 on 24 November[edit]

Comparing the versions of this article on 17 October and today, a lot has been improved but some is missing. It'd be great if somebody wanted to go back and re-integrate parts of the earlier introduction, the visual OPAC info, and the clarity of the next-generation catalog section. I don't know the subject well enough to do this myself. Dreamyshade (talk) 03:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]