I think these library wikis are a great idea - but I've always loved wikis anyway. From the big one, wikipedia, to several smaller ones on specific subjects, they're quite useful ways to find information quickly (for all that one can't take the results too seriously, because the communal nature of letting anyone or a lot of people add information increases the chance that the information will be wrong. But as a way to find information for informal purposes - they're great. I've even contributed to several pertaining to some online communities and games I'm in - where we make articles about our character's histories, and such, for our own and other's reference.
I'll admit I wasn't sure how a library could use this kind of thing, though, until I saw the St. Joseph County library wiki. It's pretty neat. All the topic subjects people are looking for, with individual pages that include everything from books on the subject to staff recommendations and links to webpages that could help people find things in the community - all very useful. Especially the 'government' section. I'm forever wondering just how some facet of the city/county/state/country bureaucracy works; how I'm supposed to go about getting a passport or renew my driver's license or pay my bills or taxes. And it looks like a lot of that can be found here, with maps and links to relevant websites.
Of course only part of this project seems to relate to books, but, after all, the library isn't just about books. People rely on us for countless things, asking for directions and information on the government, etc. I think this is a good way to get that to him (as well as throw in a few book recommendations, if that can be done. Or to find the information ourselves if we don't know it.
Monday, November 26, 2007
#15 Perspectives on Library 2.0
Perhaps it's my youth and geekiness showing, but most of what I've read about web 2.0 so far are things I'd already gotten used to on my own, and these opinions on library 2.0 only make me thing 'well, yeah...obviously'. Like in Rick Anderson's 'away from icebergs' article, I don't find the idea that there won't be such a need for a 'just in case' collection of reference materials in the future very crazy or shocking. I myself haven't picked up an encyclopedia in years (well, except when I'm shelving one). I always search in a database or something. So I've always expected there to be a day in the future when I might work in a library with no hardbound encyclopedia at all - we just have to wait for a day when most patrons know that databases exists and are comfortable with searching them instead of using a print version. And as for making services as user friendly and intuitive as possible so teaching isn't required, and giving access to them on the Internet - again, obviously!
The other perspective I read was Dr. Schultz's 'To a Temporary Place in Time'. I rather like her point that things are always changing. What I get from this is that perhaps we should less be saying 'web/library 2.0 - This is the future!' to just saying 'this is the path we seem to be taking to...well, wherever it leads us'. I think the Internet and quick to instant access of information has already changed libraries drastically (hey, I'm not so young I don't know what a card catalog was!) in the last few years, and will change them even more drastically in the future. I think the key to being comfortable in all this change is to be adaptable, and not be too shaken up by the fact that things will change almost as fast as one can learn them. To, instead of being flustered by this, see it all as kind of fun.
I do kind of wonder what she's going on about with this 3D library 3.0 stuff, though. Book avatars talking to us! I do like the idea of being represented by an avatar rather than having to go to work, but I don't quite believe that will happen. Maybe we can have AI versions of the authors talking to us too. 'Well if you liked my book, you might also like...'
The other perspective I read was Dr. Schultz's 'To a Temporary Place in Time'. I rather like her point that things are always changing. What I get from this is that perhaps we should less be saying 'web/library 2.0 - This is the future!' to just saying 'this is the path we seem to be taking to...well, wherever it leads us'. I think the Internet and quick to instant access of information has already changed libraries drastically (hey, I'm not so young I don't know what a card catalog was!) in the last few years, and will change them even more drastically in the future. I think the key to being comfortable in all this change is to be adaptable, and not be too shaken up by the fact that things will change almost as fast as one can learn them. To, instead of being flustered by this, see it all as kind of fun.
I do kind of wonder what she's going on about with this 3D library 3.0 stuff, though. Book avatars talking to us! I do like the idea of being represented by an avatar rather than having to go to work, but I don't quite believe that will happen. Maybe we can have AI versions of the authors talking to us too. 'Well if you liked my book, you might also like...'
#14 Technorati
So, the main difference I see in searching different ways on Technorati is that if you just search for posts with 'learning 2.0', you get all posts that mention it at all, which leads to a lot more results of the type where the blogger mentions it in passing, then goes on to talk about other things. Searching for the phrase within tags is more likely to bring up results where the post is almost entirely focusing on 'learning 2.0'. And then, obviously, searching in blog directory brings up entire blogs about the subject!
I guess having different ways to search is good, if you don't know just how talked about the subject you are looking for is. If it is a very common subject, it might be good to do a blog search or tag search. But if one is really having trouble finding anything, it might be time to just do a post search and sift through all the results.
As for the most popular blogs, searches, and tags...no, I can't say I find anything that interesting or surprising. Except for the fact that I'm surprised there isn't something startling and interesting among the popular searches. Something I didn't know before. I'm very used to seeing very new and different things on the Internet, so learning that most people on technorati like searching for blogs about gadgets and making money, and blog posts about myspace, Ron Paul, and Paris Hilton is sort of anticlimactic. I already knew people were wanting to read about those things.
LPLS
I guess having different ways to search is good, if you don't know just how talked about the subject you are looking for is. If it is a very common subject, it might be good to do a blog search or tag search. But if one is really having trouble finding anything, it might be time to just do a post search and sift through all the results.
As for the most popular blogs, searches, and tags...no, I can't say I find anything that interesting or surprising. Except for the fact that I'm surprised there isn't something startling and interesting among the popular searches. Something I didn't know before. I'm very used to seeing very new and different things on the Internet, so learning that most people on technorati like searching for blogs about gadgets and making money, and blog posts about myspace, Ron Paul, and Paris Hilton is sort of anticlimactic. I already knew people were wanting to read about those things.
LPLS
Monday, November 12, 2007
#13 De.licio.us
I think the idea of keeping one's links online is a great idea. Every few months I at least back my links up that way. I don't use public computers that much, but if I did it would be invaluable to be able to access them anywhere. As it is, I do use a personalized Google homepage, so I at least have my email, a few links, and my RSS feeds able to be accessed from anywhere.
I don't so much like the public part of it - meaning, anyone can see what you have linked. Luckily you don't have to make any of your links public - and I haven't. I do realize that this means I'm missing out on contributing all of my tagging info and the numbers of what pages I have linked to the 'community' at large...but, the thing is, I don't really want everyone to know what I think is worthy of being bookmarked.
I do really like that when you type in a word, and it retrieves links what that tag, it tells you how many other people have that bookmark saved. It helps you figure out which links are worthy of being clicked - well, at least what other people think is worthy.
As for it's usefulness as a research tool...both yes and no. It is a good way to find other links regarding a subject. When I searched 'Heian', for example (that's the name of a period in Japanese history), I got a great website on The Tale of Genji I had never seven seen. It would have been very useful to me when I was writing all of those Japanese history/lit papers. But because anyone can add their links to del.ici.ious, I had just as many results, maybe more, regarding an anime where one of the characters is a ghost from the Heian era (which admittedly also interests me, I love that show - but it's not useful at all in research unless you're writing a paper on Japanese pop culture). I think people would have a hard time looking at it as a serious academic tool when fun and entertainment was so mixed in with the rest.
I don't so much like the public part of it - meaning, anyone can see what you have linked. Luckily you don't have to make any of your links public - and I haven't. I do realize that this means I'm missing out on contributing all of my tagging info and the numbers of what pages I have linked to the 'community' at large...but, the thing is, I don't really want everyone to know what I think is worthy of being bookmarked.
I do really like that when you type in a word, and it retrieves links what that tag, it tells you how many other people have that bookmark saved. It helps you figure out which links are worthy of being clicked - well, at least what other people think is worthy.
As for it's usefulness as a research tool...both yes and no. It is a good way to find other links regarding a subject. When I searched 'Heian', for example (that's the name of a period in Japanese history), I got a great website on The Tale of Genji I had never seven seen. It would have been very useful to me when I was writing all of those Japanese history/lit papers. But because anyone can add their links to del.ici.ious, I had just as many results, maybe more, regarding an anime where one of the characters is a ghost from the Heian era (which admittedly also interests me, I love that show - but it's not useful at all in research unless you're writing a paper on Japanese pop culture). I think people would have a hard time looking at it as a serious academic tool when fun and entertainment was so mixed in with the rest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
