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

[Ross Singer]

On 5/4/07, Walker, David <dwalker at calstate.edu> wrote:
>
> I think perhaps all of us see the possibilities these new technologies could provide, and some of us can't wait to get to that next level.  But I think academic libraries specifically need to do a bit of a reality check on Library 2.0.
>

Thank you, David, for pulling this discussion back into actual state
of library technology.

The notion of "L2" could /only/ work in a heterogeneous and open
environment.  The restrictions that pretty much every one of our
vendors put on all our services and licensed content (at the very
least, "most") prohibits this and precludes any hope of Library 2.0
(at least in technical terms).  My question is, "who else are these
vendors selling to?"  Especially the database, journal and library
automation companies?  It's time that we, as a community, take back
control of the resources we pay so much for, since the vendors have no
desire to help us meet their needs.

"Why are undergraduate students the core audience?" -- Mark Costa

At majority of academic institutions they vastly outnumber any other
community, from anywhere from 3:1 to 20:1.  The fact that they are the
/least connected/ to the library doesn't sound to me that we should
then focus on those that appreciate what we offer (grad students,
although increasingly less and less, since they were just recently
disaffected undergrads, faculty and researchers), but it points out
how poorly we are serving our community.  Focusing on improving the
experience for undergraduates doesn't have to mean neglecting the more
advanced users.  What it can mean is an overall improvement in service
to /everybody/ by offering a more unified and logical and open
interface for everyone.

I feel there's a bit of a 'let them eat cake!' attitude about
tailoring only to the needs of the research community.

-Ross.