[16451] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
[CurrentCites] Current Cites, January 2006
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy Tennant)
Tue Jan 31 20:33:42 2006
X-Original-To: currentcites@lists.webjunction.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1321258928=="
Errors-To: currentcites-bounces@webjunction.org
Message-ID: <57CD9C31-CEAE-483D-8514-06D6C6DC98CF@ucop.edu>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 10:57:19 -0800
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU>
From: Roy Tennant <roy.tennant@UCOP.EDU>
To: PACS-L@LISTSERV.UH.EDU
--===============1321258928==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1;
delsp=yes;
format=flowed
Current Cites, January 2006
Edited by Roy Tennant
http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2006/cc06.17.1.html
Contributors: Charles W. Bailey, Jr., Shirl Kennedy, Leo Robert =20
Klein, Roy Tennant
"Google Free to Cache: Court" Red Herring (26 January 2006)(http://=20
www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=3D15493&hed=3DGoogle+Free+to+Cache%3A=20=
+Court§or=3DIndustries&subsector=3DInternetAndServices#). - Guess =20=
what? It's not the end of the world as we know it. A federal district =20=
court in Nevada has ruled in Field v. Google that Google's Website =20
indexing practices don't violate copyright law. Just imagine if the =20
ruling had gone the other way. Time to get permission from billions =20
of Websites' owners (and any other copyright owners with material on =20
those Websites) before indexing them. Ouch! In a related press =20
release from EFF, Fred von Lohmann, senior staff attorney, says: "The =20=
ruling should also help Google in defending against the lawsuit =20
brought by book publishers over its Google Library Project, as well =20
as assisting organizations like the Internet Archive that rely on =20
caching." I don't know about you, but I feel fine about this =20
copyright ruling (for a change). - CB
Crawford, Walt. "Library 2.0 and 'Library 2.0'" Cites & Insights: =20
Crawford at Large 6(2)(2006): 1-32. (http://cites.boisestate.edu/=20
civ6i2.pdf). - Library 2.0 is all the buzz, but what is it really? =20
That's the question that Walt Crawford set out to answer. The result =20
is a 32-page essay that includes 62 views, 7 definitions, many =20
perspectives by library bloggers and others, and, of course, =20
Crawford's incisive analysis of it all. By far, this is the =20
definitive piece on this rather amorphous topic. Crawford draws a =20
distinction between Library 2.0, the conceptual aggregate that =20
embodies a variety of software and service innovations, and "Library =20
2.0," the "bandwagon." He favors the former, but feels the latter =20
"carries too much baggage." This is Crawford at his best, and, love =20
it or hate it, it's a stimulating article that informs and provokes =20
serious thought. (See also his follow-up article.) - CB
Glazer, Becky. "Digital Library Curriculum Project" Collegiate =20
Times (26 January 2006)(http://www.collegiatetimes.com/news/1/=20
ARTICLE/6358/2006-01-26.html?sid=3D945afea211a7d357e7fa7b5878cf28c6). - =20=
Digital libraries have such a high profile in our profession these =20
days that it is sometimes easy to forget how new this concept is. =20
Which means, as this article points out, that there really is a =20
dearth of adequately trained individuals to build and maintain these =20
repositories. This year, however, the University of North Carolina =20
and Virginia Tech are jointly developing "a quality educational =20
curriculum on the development and preservation of digital libraries," =20=
thanks to three years' worth of funding from a National Science =20
Foundation grant. Virginia Tech has a top-quality computer science =20
program and UNC's SLIS is ranked number one by U.S. News and World =20
Report, which should make for an excellent collaboration. The project =20=
includes the development of both online and off-line course modules =20
as well as supplementary course materials. - SK
Guy, Marieke, and Emma Tonkin. "Folksonomies: Tidying Up Tags?" D-=20
Lib Magazine 12(1)(http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january06/guy/=20
01guy.html). - Short "seat-of-the-pants" examination of user-=20
generated folksonomies as practiced at del.icio.us and flikr. The =20
authors identify a "natural tendency towards the convergence of =20
tags". That said, there seems to be a great variation in spelling and =20=
use of punctuation with upwards of a third of the terms. The authors =20
discuss ways to improve both the system and the practices of people =20
using the system. At the same time, they're mindful of the benefits =20
that an open system despite its irregularities can have. - LRK
Rubino, Ken. "Self-Publishing: The Internet Makes It Easier to Go =20
from Idea to Print" Link-Up Digital (15 January 2006)(http://=20
www.infotoday.com/linkup/lud011506-rubino.shtml). - One of my staff =20
recently sent a customer my way. A lieutenant colonel on the cusp of =20
retirement. He wanted to write a book. My new book came out recently. =20=
Therefore I could help this man, right? Actually I could -- since I'd =20=
just stumbled across this article on the Information Today website. =20
Lots of people want to write books. Most of them will never get =20
around to it. And of those who do come up with a completed =20
manuscript, relatively few will make it over the hurdles of the =20
traditional publishing process. But that doesn't matter nearly as =20
much as it used to; self-publishing flourishes in myriad forms on the =20=
Internet, as this article points out. =46rom the humble weblog to full-=20=
service self-publishing companies -- the opportunities are out there, =20=
waiting for the aspiring author to click on them. Naturally, there =20
are caveats; Rubino, "a professional photographer and occasional =20
freelance writer" discusses some of them, offers advice about what to =20=
look for when choosing a self-publishing company and provides =20
websites you can browse for more information. He recommends Books =20
Just Books as a good starting point for the would-be self-published =20
author. - SK
Sadeh, Tamar. "Google Scholar Versus Metasearch Systems" HEP =20
Libraries Webzine (12)(February 2006)(http://library.cern.ch/HEPLW/=20
12/papers/1/). - The advent of Google Scholar has made many question =20
whether libraries need expensive metasearching systems to unify =20
searching of multiple sources. This thoughtful and informative =20
article addresses this question, and even attempts to clarify the =20
confusing terminology by drawing clear distinctions between =20
"metasearching" (just-in-time unification such as most library =20
metasearch tools) and "federated searching" (just-in-case unification =20=
like Google Scholar). Although the author is an employee of ExLibris =20
(vendor of the MetaLib metasearching tool), and naturally uses =20
MetaLib as an example system, what she discusses is generally =20
applicable to the metasearching environment as a whole. She also =20
reviews other metasearching efforts such as Elsevier's Scirus system. =20=
Those who are knowledgeable about the isssues will not be surprised =20
that Sadeh does not come down on the side of Google, nor against it. =20
Rather, she acknowledges the utility of both Google Scholar and =20
library-based metasearch services when each is appropriate, as well =20
as carefully watching developments in industry as a whole. This is =20
altogether the best overview of Google Scholar, other large federated =20=
search systems such as Scirus, and library-based metasearch tools =20
I've seen. Full disclosure: as a MetaLib customer I have worked with =20
Ms. Sadeh and some of my work is cited in her article. - RT
Suber, Peter. "The U.S. CURES Act Would Mandate OA" SPARC Open =20
Access Newsletter (93)(2006)(http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/=20
newsletter/01-02-06.htm#cures). - In this article, Suber overviews =20
and analyzes the American Center for CURES Act of 2005 (S.2104). This =20=
important bill would mandate open access to all research funded in =20
whole or part by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, =20
which is roughly half of all non-classified federally funded =20
research. Deposit of the final, peer-reviewed versions of articles =20
would be required when they were accepted, and any access embargo =20
periods could only last six months. Non-compliance by grantees could =20
result in the denial of future funding. Government employees' =20
articles would also covered by the bill. - CB
Teachout, Terry. "A Hundred Books in Your Pocket" The Wall Street =20
Journal (21 January 2006)(http://online.wsj.com/public/article/=20
SB113779027926552261.html?mod=3Dtodays_free_feature). - As you can =20
probably guess from the title, this article is about e-books -- more =20
specifically, Sony's announcement of a new paperback-sized e-book =20
reader that will use E Ink, a state-of-the-art display technology =20
that is supposed to be like reading from paper (obviously the gold =20
standard). Even more interesting, perhaps, is Sony's intention to =20
open a new iTunes-like store for downloadable e-books. Three major =20
publishers -- HarperCollins, Random House and Simon & Schuster -- =20
have signed on; "HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster are plan to make =20
their entire backlists available for downloading as soon as they =20
negotiate royalty rights with the authors." The author thinks this =20
will be what causes Sony's reader -- due for release this spring -- =20
to take off. Like the wiildly popular iPod and iTunes, this is "what =20
marketers call an 'end to end' solution to the problem of the e-book" =20=
-- one-stop shopping for content, as it were. The author seem to feel =20=
quite strongly that the printed book, as "a technology," is circling =20
the drain. "Like all technologies," he says, "it has a finite life =20
span, and its time is almost up." - SK
University of California Libraries Bibliographic Services Task Force. =20=
Rethinking How We Provide Bibliographic Services for the University =20
of California Oakland, CA: University of California, December 2005.=20
(http://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/sopag/BSTF/Final.pdf). - =20=
In a no-holds-barred report by this University of California task =20
force, much of the existing library bibliographic insfrastructure is =20
blasted as being out-of-date and inadequate. "The current Library =20
catalog," states the report, "is poorly designed for the tasks of =20
finding, discovering, and selecting the growing set of resources =20
available in our libraries." But it doesn't stop there, in either =20
uncovering deficiencies nor in recommending potentially fruitful =20
directions. The thrust of the report can perhaps be perceived by the =20
headings under which the recommendations for futher action are =20
grouped: "Enhancing Search and Retrieval," "Rearchitecting the OPAC," =20=
"Adopting New Cataloging Practices," and "Supporting Continuing =20
Improvement." Although this report is specific to the UC environment, =20=
I suspect that many institutions find themselves in a similar =20
situation and therefore reviewing this report carefully is likely to =20
be instructive. Full disclosure: I am a UC employee and was =20
interviewed by the task force in the process of producing this =20
report. - RT
Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at =20
WebJunction.org.
=A9 Copyright 2006 by Roy Tennant
--===============1321258928==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
CurrentCites mailing list
CurrentCites@webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/
--===============1321258928==--
