[16573] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
[CurrentCites] Current Cites, February 2006
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy Tennant)
Wed Mar 1 20:38:59 2006
X-Original-To: currentcites@lists.webjunction.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0592975277=="
Errors-To: currentcites-bounces@webjunction.org
Message-ID: <8EC3E996-BD48-4107-B0C8-F045B2D71AD2@ucop.edu>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -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
--===============0592975277==
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1;
delsp=yes;
format=flowed
Current Cites, February 2006
Edited by Roy Tennant
http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2006/cc06.17.2.html
Contributors: Charles W. Bailey, Jr., Shirl Kennedy, Leo Robert =20
Klein, Roy Tennant
code4lib Conference 2006 Corvallis, OR: code4lib, 15-17 February =20
2006.(http://www.code4lib.org/2006/schedule/). - The code4lib =20
Conference was put together by a group of tech-savvy librarians who =20
hang out in the code4lib chatroom and mailing list in literally a =20
matter of a few months. This is the first in what they hope to be an =20
annual event, aimed at those with a need for a more technical =20
conference than the usual library fare. Here you can see what these =20
folks are thinking about, what they use, and what they think is good =20
and bad, and perhaps get an early taste of what's to come in your own =20=
library someday. Given that the conference only occurred a matter of =20
days before this publication went to press, not all the presentations =20=
are yet available. But more will be added in the coming days, and =20
several of the program descriptions link out to web sites that =20
provide more information. Full disclosure: I was on the program =20
committee. - RT
Bailey, Jr., Charles W. "What is Open Access?" Open Access: Key =20
Strategic, Technical, and Economic Aspects (7 February 2006)(http://=20
www.digital-scholarship.com/cwb/WhatIsOA.pdf). - In this preprint of =20
a book chapter to be published by Chandos Publishing this year, =20
Current Cites' own Charles W. Bailey, Jr. explains and summarizes the =20=
"Open Access" movement within the scholarly and research communities =20
of higher education. Bailey begins with defining open access by =20
reference to definitions from several key documents such as the =20
Budapest Open Acess Initiative. Following this is a definition of the =20=
subset of open access activities called "self-archiving" by its main =20
proponent Stevan Harnad. The next section deals with open access =20
journals. For more information, readers are directed to the author's =20
Open Access Webliography, an essential resource in the field. Given =20
the goals of this particular book chapter, those familiar with the =20
open access movement will be familiar with much of what Bailey =20
covers, but for someone new to the issue it is an excellent summary =20
of key issues. - RT
Dean, John W. "Why Should Anyone Worry About Whose Communications =20
Bush and Cheney Are Intercepting, If It Helps To Find Terrorists?" =20
FindLaw (24 February 2006)(http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/=20
20060224.html). - According to a statistic quoted in this column, =20
"The NSA is now eavesdropping on as many as five hundred people in =20
the United States at any given time." That is one heck of a lot of =20
data; experts assume the NSA is indulging in data mining, which the =20
author defines as "the use of computer algorithms to search =20
automatically through massive amounts of data." A huge problem with =20
data mining, of course, is the number of false positives. Which ups =20
the potential for innocent people to get caught in the net. Maybe =20
you're one of those folks who isn't worried about things like this =20
because you "have nothing to hide." But the very idea of the =20
government amassing huge amounts of personal data on its citizens is =20
troubling. Says the author, "Many people trust the government not to =20
abuse or misuse this information. Based on experience, I don't." He =20
knows from whence he speaks. If you're old enough to remember =20
Watergate, you likely remember John Dean as counsel to President =20
Nixon. - SK
Garrett, Jeffrey. "KWIC and Dirty? Human Cognition and the Claims of =20
Full-Text Searching" Journal of Electronic Publishing 9(1)(February =20=
2006)(http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0009.106). - Diatribe =20
against the evils of keyword searching. Complaints include not =20
allowing for context or metaphor. Works are like "organisms" and =20
plucking out KWICs is to deracinate them and to "carry them away from =20=
their native settings with some additional word material still =20
clinging to them, like dirt to roots." Keyword results produce a lack =20=
of coherence "fundamentally at odds with natural patterns of =20
knowledge acquisition." The facts are disassociated and resemble =20
"garbage heaps" of knowledge. You may not agree with the proposition =20
but you'll be swept off your feet by the literary allusions, and that =20=
ought to count for something. One of several articles in the newly =20
resuscitated Journal of Electronic Publishing. The journal is now =20
published by UMich's "Scholarly Publishing Office" and the article by =20=
Maria Bonn on their model of scholarly publishing is also worth a =20
read. - LRK
Hahn, Karla. "The State of the Large Publisher Bundle: Findings from =20
an ARL Member Survey" ARL Bimonthly Report (245)(April 2006)(http://=20=
www.arl.org/newsltr/245/bundle.html). - Academic libraries have long =20
been familiar which what has been termed "the big deal" (most notably =20=
by Kenneth Frazier in a 2001 D-Lib Magazine article) -- large =20
conglomerations of electronic resources sold as a bundle. This means =20
libraries either get everything or nothing from a particular =20
publisher. Such an inability to cancel individual titles puts =20
additional pressure on libraries to cancel unbundled titles to =20
compensate. Therefore, to find out more about the big deal and =20
libraries response to it, ARL conducted a survey in 2005. There is =20
much of interest here for anyone interested in licensing resources =20
for academic libraries, but in a nutshell ARL believes that libraries =20=
can advocate for better license terms without unduly reducing =20
publisher profit. - RT
Jacobs, Neil. "Digital Repositories in UK Universities and Colleges" =20=
FreePint (200)(2006)(http://www.freepint.com/issues/=20
160206.htm#feature). - In 1993, the UK did a smart thing: it =20
established the UK Joint Information Systems Committee (or JISC for =20
short). Since then, JISC-funded technology projects have kept UK =20
academic libraries on the cutting edge of innovative networked =20
services and technologies. Little wonder then that UK libraries have =20
been leaders in the rapidly evolving movement to develop =20
institutional repositories and other types of digital archives. As =20
the manager the JISC Digital Repositories development programme, Neil =20=
Jacobs knows this important work well, and, in this article, he =20
provides a link-packed, amazingly compact bird's-eye view of it that =20
is authoritative and highly readable. Don't just zip through the =20
short text. Rather, take the time to explore the numerous project =20
links. You'll be glad that you did. - CB
Rusbridge, Chris. "Excuse Me... Some Digital Preservation =20
Fallacies?" Ariadne (46)(February 2006)(http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/=20
issue46/rusbridge/). - In this tenth-anniversary issue, Rusbridge =20
takes on some digital preservation assertions or assumptions that he =20
believes underlies many of the preservation discussions happening =20
today. They are: 1) digital preservation is very expensive, 2) file =20
formats become obsolete very rapidly, 3) interventions must occur =20
frequently, 4) digital preservation repositories should have very =20
long timescale aspirations, 5) 'Internet-age' expectations are such =20
that the preserved object must be easily and instantly accessible in =20
the format de jour, and 6) the preserved object must be faithful to =20
the original in all respects. After arguing with these assumptions, =20
he restates them at the end of the piece as: 1) digital preservation =20
is comparatively inexpensive, compared to preservation in the print =20
world, 2) file formats become obsolete rather more slowly than we =20
thought, 3) interventions can occur rather infrequently, ensuring =20
that continuing costs remain containable, 4) digital preservation =20
repositories should have timescale aspirations adjusted to their =20
funding and business case, but should be prepared for their =20
succession, 5) "Internet-age" expectations cannot be met by most =20
digital repositories; and, 6) only desiccated versions of the =20
preserved object need be easily and instantly accessible in the =20
format de jour, although the original bit-stream and good =20
preservation metadata or documentation should be available for those =20
who wish to invest in extracting extra information or capability." - RT
Sohn, Gigi. "Don't Blow It, Congress" CNET News.com (6 February =20
2006)(http://news.com.com/Dont+blow+it%2C+Congress/=20
2010-1023_3-6035094.html?tag=3Dfd_carsl). - "Net neutrality" isn't =20
exactly a phrase that immediately stirs the blood. In fact, it might =20
evoke a "so what?" mental yawn. But, a closer look suggests that the =20
future of the Internet as a digital medium that supports vigorous =20
innovation and free-flowing information may be at stake. Here's how =20
EDUCAUSE defines the term in its useful Net Neutrality Web page: =20
"'Net neutrality' is the term used to describe the concept of keeping =20=
the Internet open to all lawful content, information, applications, =20
and equipment. There is increasing concern that the owners of the =20
local broadband connections (usually either the cable or telephone =20
company) may block or discriminate against certain Internet users or =20
applications in order to give an advantage to their own services." In =20=
this article, Gigi Sohn, President of Public Knowledge, lays out the =20
case for Congress to enact legislation that will ensure Net =20
neutrality in a rapidly changing telecommunications landscape. Will =20
Congress enact such legislation? Maybe not, in spite of Vint Cerf, =20
one of the fathers of the Internet, saying that without Net =20
neutrality: "We risk losing the Internet as a catalyst for consumer =20
choice, for economic growth, for technological innovation and for =20
global competitiveness" (see "Politicos Divided on Need for 'Net =20
Neutrality' Mandate"). Noted legal scholar Lawrence Lessig has also =20
weighed in on the issue in his Senate Committee on Commerce, Science =20
and Transportation testimony, which is also well worth reading. - CB
Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at =20
WebJunction.org.
=A9 Copyright 2006 by Roy Tennant
--===============0592975277==
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/
--===============0592975277==--
