On ISBNs

Hot topic these days. Weirdest thing I ever did see. At any rate, in response to my newsletter piece, "ISBNs for Everything", I received this from Marty Brooks (who has kindly given me permission to post):

Back in my Bowker days (1986-1996), when we first realized we were going to have to expand the ISBN to more than 10-digits, there were numerous debates about whether the ISBN should still retain meaning:  the country/language code and the publisher prefix.   Professionals in the field argue this both ways.   When we were considering establishing a system for digital content numbering, the web consultants we worked with argued against building any meaning into IDs.   I always liked the idea and wanted to maintain it.

In the media industry, there was a standard using the UPC system that assigned a media digit to the number (the number before the check digit.)  That’s why most CDs have a "2" before the check digit.   Using this schema, you could tie all of the different media versions of an intellectual work together with the same number, except for the media digit and the check digit.   Unfortunately, not all the media publishers adopted the scheme and even among those that did, it wouldn’t have handled the case of a letterbox version of a DVD and a full-screen version.   But in theory, I always thought it was a great idea:  imagine if the ISBN were the same for a mass-market, trade-paper, hardbound and even an audio version, except for the media identifier and the check digit (and ignoring that frequently paperbacks are published by different publishers than the hardbound and therefore, it would have a completely different number anyway.)  

I had always thought that the DCI should have been an extension of the ISBN.   The ISBN would have represented the parent work and the various derivations, elements and digital versions of the work would have extensions of the original number.

One of the things that’s troubled me about the implementation of the ISBN-13 is that until you start using the 979s, you don’t gain any numbers.   And once you do use the 979, if you use the same publisher prefixes for the 979 as for the 978, the core of the number (except for the check digit) could be the same for two different books from the same publisher.  I would find that confusing, but I suppose the standards committees did not.  To my way of thinking, making the ISBN-13 totally consistent with the EAN made it less useful than it could have been, although "Bookland’ has always put a smile on my face.

The Whitakers, who along with Emory Koltay in the U.S. were responsible for the development and implementation of the ISBN, were always opposed to using the ISBN for anything but printed books.   I always disagreed with that and the fact is that there was no way to control this anyway because aside from what most people think, the ISBN Agencies do not really assign numbers – they assign a prefix and rules – the publishers assign the numbers.   My feeling back then was that anything that was circulated in a library (except perhaps for periodicals and sheet music, which had their own numbering systems) or sold by a bookstore should have had an ISBN.   So when you state, "ISBN’s for everything," I completely agree.

I find it baffling that publishers don’t want to assign ISBNs to digital content since either the rights have to be tracked or the sales have to be tracked and any system they’re using is going to require a unique identifier anyway, even if it’s automatically generated.   As long as you’re using a unique identifier, it might as well be the ISBN.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on Persona Non Data about the ISBN today as well.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on about the ISBN today as well.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on about the ISBN today as well.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on about the ISBN today as well.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on about the ISBN today as well.

Michael Cairns has a great bit on about the ISBN today as well.

Thinking about ebooks

New computer

It’s astonishing how disruptive it is. I keep all my files on an external hard drive – the computer itself just contains applications. But of course once you institute a new system, you find that – as Ted Hill says – you’re shining a light into some formerly dark places…and you see a lot of worms and rolypoly bugs. (Okay, he didn’t say that about the rolypoly bugs, but you get the point.)

So of course I had to clean up a lot of files, and upgrade a lot of applications, and I am JUST NOW getting used to these new interfaces.

I’m in the midst of consulting to a company who’s about to go through something like this on a grand scale. Changing workflow, migrating files, creating new taxonomies. I know it’s been two weeks since I’ve blogged, and even Twittering is proving a pain in the butt. (I mean, yes, I had a birthday in there as well, and then there was Father’s Day – but that’s just life.) Trying to integrate a new system into everyday life is painful, frustrating, annoying…and that’s when things are going well! You spend a ridiculous amount of time reconfiguring things when you just want to get on with the work. Or play. Or blogging. Or whatever. And there’s nothing to be done about it – you just have to get through it until the system is more or less invisible again and your focus is back where it should be…on what you’re trying to accomplish.

Now if I could just get the NYTimes website to recognize my crossword puzzle cookie, everything will be perfect again.

Forest for the Trees

Via Peter Brantley, Seth Godin blogs about his concern for publishing:

I worry about my esteemed friends in the book publishing industry as well. The amazing thing about the Times story today was the report that the mood at BEA was ‘unease’ about ebooks. The fastest-growing, lowest cost segment of the business, the one that offers the most promise, the best possible outcome and has the best results… is causing unease! All because of the trees.

The article Seth’s referring to is, of course, this one. But the unease was not necessarily on the part of publishers (although they are still charging as much for an ebook as they are for a print one). It was largely on the part of booksellers:

A big advantage of the products is that bookstores never sell out of copies of an electronic book, something Mr. Bezos demonstrated by downloading and reading from “What Happened,” which in hardcover format has sold out in many stores. Amazon itself expects to be unable to ship new copies until June 21, according to its Web site. Barnesandnoble.com says it expects the book to be available June 6. That too makes bookstore owners nervous about the future of electronic books. “We’re always concerned with any competition,” Mr. Stillwagon, of Tattered Cover, said. “The technology has progressed, and people are embracing it. For us, every book sale counts.”

That is understandable, of course. And bookstores need to figure out how they’re going to vie with Amazon (and potentially B&N.com) and other web retailers to offer ebooks. And perhaps they can’t do this.

Google, Books, and Mutable Information

Robert Darnton has a great piece in the NY Review of Books on information in the digital age – how do we trust blogs, how do we look at information when so much damage can be done by the instant spiraling of rumors on the web, how do we regard the viral nature of information? He traces the history of the written word from vellum to Google and notes:

Information has never been stable. That may be a truism, but it bears pondering. It could serve as a corrective to the belief that the speedup in technological change has catapulted us into a new age, in which information has spun completely out of control. I would argue that the new information technology should force us to rethink the notion of information itself. It should not be understood as if it took the form of hard facts or nuggets of reality ready to be quarried out of newspapers, archives, and libraries, but rather as messages that are constantly being reshaped in the process of transmission. Instead of firmly fixed documents, we must deal with multiple, mutable texts. By studying them skeptically on our computer screens, we can learn how to read our daily newspaper more effectively—and even how to appreciate old books.

He then goes on to talk about Google’s role in digitizing books, pointing out that Google will not be digitizing ALL the books ever written, and that as Google makes choices about what to digitize, important books could be left out because Google cannot recognize their importance. As Darnton says, "The criteria of importance change from generation to generation, so we cannot know what will matter to our descendants….Google employs hundreds, perhaps thousands, of engineers but, as far as I know, not a single bibliographer." A really thought-provoking read.

The Dark Moment Came

Publishers Lunch announced today that Borders has laid off a total of 274 corporate employees as of this morning. Having been part of a large (350) layoff at B&N during the .com bust, I definitely can empathize. Send me your resumes – I’ll pass them around. We’re all in this economy together.

Never Gonna Happen, My Friend

Henry Blodget’s got a piece in Silicon Alley Insider – yes, THAT Henry Blodget – looking at the book industry. Because he knows so much about it, he’s got a lot of insight that those of us who’ve been in the business for decades are obviously too benighted to apprehend:

How can publishers fix their business? Not by killing more trees. By radically retooling the business model.

Ebooks, people! Ebooks are going to save the industry. If publishers would only sell a few hardcovers and do the rest of their inventory as ebooks (forget about paperbacks – ebooks will replace them!), then we can spike sales and…Oh, hell.

Random’s New Chief a Mechanic

The Times reports this morning on Hartmut Ostrowski, head of Bertlesmann, and Markus Dohle, his newly-appointed CEO of Random House:

Two weeks ago, he named Markus Dohle, a 39-year-old German who runs the company’s printing operations, as chief executive of Random House, the world’s largest consumer book publisher.

It is roughly akin to putting the head mechanic in charge of an entire airline. While Mr. Ostrowski, 50, acknowledges the risk of choosing an executive like Mr. Dohle, he is not about to apologize for the new focus on Bertelsmann’s nuts-and-bolts side, or for a strategic rethinking….

In principle, it’s a gorgeous idea – becoming more focused on back-end technologies that will position you to take better advantage of some of the new supply chain efficiencies coming down the pike. Of course, this leaves editorial and business development people a little frustrated – it’s not very glamorous – and their complaints can be rather loud. What those folks have to remember, though, is that by focusing on the back end (all those boring systems like SAP and printing/production and inventory), you’re in a much better position to sell the glamorous stuff.  Trying to create products and sell them without support is a great recipe for instant obsolescence.