[Web4lib] Interesting Web/Library 2.0 data (wasparticpationSkillsfor Library 2.0 Leaders)

[Walker, David]

I think the largest barrier we face in implementing the ideas of 'Library 2.0' is that libraries have never really solved *the* fundamental problem from the days of 'Library 1.0' -- namely, integration.
 
Getting your data out to other places and allowing people to contribute data back is all well and good.  I'm all for it.
 
But if your Library is offering RSS feeds and tagging and other social features among a half-dozen vendor-developed systems and hundreds of remotely hosted databases -- none of which know anything about each other or even operate in the same way -- then we've greatly diminished the utility of these features.  Who wants to go hunting around for RSS feeds or tagging records in a dozen different library systems?  Would it not be better to have all of that in one system?  
 
I think Library / Learning Management System integration is probably *the* most important thing academic libraries should be working on.  But, again, before we do that, we need to get all of our library systems integrated together, otherwise we just end up recreating the distributed, disconnected mess of the library in a new space.
 
'Library 2.0' is, as far as I can tell, also about opening systems up, and I think that is ultimately what is going to drive the integration I'm talking about. The problem, though, is that a lot of our vendors are now rushing to add tagging and RSS feeds and other features to their current systems, and not focusing on developing good APIs.  How many ILS systems and aggregator sites are still only accessible via Z39.50?
 
The Library community is driving this by focusing on social features *before* focusing on integration.  Layering Web 2.0 over a fragmented, disconnected systems architecture perpetuates our problems.  Let's focus on integration first, demanding that our vendors create good, open APIs.  That will make everything else we want to do much, much easier -- even the old fashioned things of 'Library 1.0'.
 
--Dave
 
-------------------
David Walker
Library Web Services Manager
California State University
http://xerxes.calstate.edu

________________________________

From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org on behalf of Rob Amend
Sent: Thu 5/3/2007 10:17 AM
To: web4lib at webjunction.org
Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Interesting Web/Library 2.0 data (wasparticpationSkillsfor Library 2.0 Leaders)



Exactly!  Libraries need to push information to those who want/need it, not
wait for patrons to approach our institutional sites.

On 5/3/07, Hutchens, Chad <chutchens at montana.edu> wrote:
>
> Getting our content elsewhere in our users' daily routines without forcing
> them to go to our library websites....Relying on people to come through the
> library website as a gateway is a very dated idea to be sure.  And I do
> think that new technologies can be the vehicle that drives that change.  XML
> is perhaps the most promising of them all.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Chad Hutchens
> E-Resources Librarian
> Montana State University
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Rob Amend
> Reference Librarian
> rob.amend at gmail.com
> reftechrob.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
Web4lib mailing list
Web4lib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/