In the Year 3000...

It's Thursday, and for me the semester is beginning to wind down. There's been a lot to do, especially in my digital libraries course. One of the things that keeps me centered in this whole digital libraries movement and my education in it is this image, a cover by Dan Clowes for The New Yorker:

The Semantic Web

This idea of the semantic or linked web is a concept I have been wrestling with over several months. It's a concept I see bandied about regularly in American Libraries, but I think it's something few people outside of the programming and IT world take the time to familiarize themselves with. As a librarian, I think it's my responsibility to at least be conversant with this new web initiative, and (as I think it's a great concept) it is something I would like to advocate for.

How to Open a New Book

This has been floating around the internet for a while, and I'd like to share with you some thoughts about the image and why it has such interest now. First, though, here's the graphic:

What is a Digital Library?

As I discussed earlier this week, my final semester at Syracuse as an MSLIS student started on Monday. During the course of the semester, as I have done in the past, I want to share with you discussions that arise from class, as well as questions that come to mind. This week, I (and my fellow students) have been asked to answer this question:

What is a Digital Library?

Books and Literacy in the Digital Age Article Thoughts

As you have surely read now, as a part of my ALA membership, I get the American Libraries magazine every month. While in Lubbock, I finished up the latest (August 2010) issue, and had some thoughts on one of the articles:

Books and Literacy in the Digital Age, by Ralph Raab

I must admit that I, like the author, have a love for the physical book - so much so that we have 274 books in our library at this time. I think the only e-books we have are the ones that came free with our iPad. I love them for many reasons that Raab mentions (as so many others before him have mentioned) but the best thing about a book to me is the reading experience. Not holding a book, or how it smells, but how the text is highly readable on the page in most any lighting conditions. In addition, a book (with some effort) will always "be there" meaning that in 200 years, one can still access and use the majority of books we have today - but the digital nature of e-books does not hold the same guarantee.

Death of the Inscription?

On Wednesday, I was reading this Times article:

Book Inscriptions Reflect Personal Histories, by Susan Dominus

In the article, Dominus highlights the idea that the inscription could go away if our society completely embraces digital books, and abandons physical books. She was thinking specifically about personal inscriptions - when one writes a note to a friend on the occasion of giving them the book, for example. I’d like to think of this in a bit different context: when the author signs or inscribes the book.

Both in our personal collection, as well as the collection of the Amon Carter, there are many signed books. One of the best I have seen at the Carter was a book about the photographs of Ansel Adams, inscribed to Laura Gilpin, describing her as a “very great lady of photography,” and it had a cool little doodle as well. (The Carter has the book as Gilpin donated her papers, prints, negatives, and library to the Carter on her passing.) We have several (12, I think) signed books, and they are among our favorites. How does one get the author to sign your e-book? Do they sign the reader? Type a note into the document?

I know it’s not exactly the most earth-shattering concept, but it is one that is important to me, as well as to many other folks out there. Would you miss inscriptions?

Favorites from the Commons

(Before I get started, I want to give a shout-out to the inspiration for this post, Allison V. Smith’s posting about the Commons. Thanks, Allison!)

I think I’ve mentioned the Flickr Commons before. As a matter of fact, I have. Check this post out:

New Fun Photos from the Library of Congress

Well, it’s not just the Library of Congress sharing their images and such on flickr, 44 major cultural institutions are contributing to the Commons. You can see the list here. I love that these institutions are showing some leadership in digitization - and what a great way to digitize. All you really have to do is scan and upload, and flickr takes care of the rest.

And what advantage does this have over simply cataloging the images, you might ask? Well, it allows people to examine them and (in the case of the photos in the Commons as they are public domain) re-use them in different works. It gives people from far away the ability to view your library/institution’s holdings. However, following the idea of participatory librarianship, if one could track what people “do” with these images (if they reuse them, or adapt/incorporate them) what a wonderful way to show the relevancy of what it is that you are doing (digitizing and sharing) and how your collection is reaching a wider audience than those in the immediate geographic vicinity. Imagine if someone used one of your images for, say, a billboard in Miami? With the proper crediting, what cool exposure for your library!

Anyhow, here are some of my favorite images from the Commons, and pleace click on the image to see where I “got it” from. I made a “gallery” on flickr of them with my comments, and you can check that out here:

Best of the Commons, A Gallery.

Yale Library Studies

Among the books I read last month, I completed the annual issue of Yale Library Studies. As it dealt with library design and architecture, my interest was especially piqued to read the issue, and I was not disappointed. Wonderfully illustrated, with many great articles, the issue had a great deal to offer. Over the coming weeks, I will discuss with you some of the things I took from my reading of the issue, but for now, allow me to leave you with this quote which I feel is applicable to all libraries:

A question that has exercised more than one University Librarian, however, is how far that truth so evident in stone and metal and wood manifests itself in the interior life of Yale. To what extent do the Library's many buildings embody the ideals and aspirations of the University? Do the scholars and students who use these buildings find in them not just the books and collections but also the environment the need to help them teach and study and learn? And what, in a twenty-first century library system, is the relationship between the virtual environment found on the computer or handheld device and the physical built environment?

I know I already posted this, but I would like to hear your thoughts before I move forward!

iPad: One Month

One month (or so) has passed since we bought an iPad, and I thought you might be curious to know how that is working our for us. I think mine will join many other bloggers writing about this, but I am not them, so here we go.

Confession: the iPad is not my constant companion. I don’t take it everywhere, nor do I use it all the time. I suppose there are people out there who use theirs all the time, but really I don’t find myself in situations where the iPad is useful all the time.

More specifically, what do I use it for?

Over the past two weeks, I have used it most every morning to read the news. The New York Times app is wonderful, and brings me a selection of headlines that change as the day progresses. I think others might lament that you cannot see the whole paper, but I prefer having someone curate the articles beforehand, so there is less to choose from. I realize that this is a bit like our grandparents reading the paper every morning over breakfast, and on some level, that appeals to me as well. The key difference (or advantage) for me is twofold: that the iconic graphic identity of the Times is preserved, and reading articles on the iPad is far preferable to reading them on a traditional computer, regardless of if they are in a reader, or their native website. Here is a screenshot of what I was reading yesterday:


I also love watching video podcasts and videos in general on the iPad. They look wonderful, and it’s great to be able to have the video wherever you want it. I have watched many TEDTalks on this, and plan to continue doing so!

When we do take the iPad places, it is excellent for sharing photos. The ability to utilize faces and places from both iPhoto and Aperture is wonderful, and our grandparents (who normally have a hard time with this stuff) loved seeing photos on it, and had no problem seeing them.

I would say I use the iPad about an hour a day at this point, though that might change as time goes on.

What are my complaints? Well, wifi reception is pretty awful. In our living room I get spotty reception, and that is not very far from our router. Hopefully, Apple will be able to improve this with a software update. Also, Facebook needs an iPad app.

Do you have an iPad? What do you think about it? Any questions for me? Let me hear from you!

Yale Library Studies

Reader,

Thanks for bearing with me - the end of the semester has passed, and my work is all turned in. It’s nice to get positive feedback on tasks which required a great deal of work. More on that later.

For now, I want to share with you that I am reading the 2009 issue of Yale Library Studies. This issue examines library architecture at Yale, and more broadly library architecture in general. Expect to see some design related library posts soon. Here’s a snippet:

To what extent do the Library's many buildings embody the ideals and aspirations of the University? Do the scholars and students who use these buildings find in them not just the books and collections but also the environment the need to help them teach and study and learn? And what, in a twenty-first century library system, is the relationship between the virtual environment found on the computer or handheld device and the physical built environment?

How would you answer those questions?

Alice for the IPad: The Future?

Remember a few posts back, I mention that in the iPad, we might be seeing into the future of magazine publishing? This video will show you just a bit of what is possible with this new device and reading:


















This video really showcases what the iPad has over all other electronic-type readers: interactiveness. Until now, readers have just been another method for presenting that which we see in physical books - graphics and text. Other than convenience, there has been really nothing to differentiate books from their electronic counterparts.

Until now. (As I said above)

Of course, this is not the best example of what one can do with the iPad, merely a taste. This Alice in Wonderland book is an app, which is already a problem. Books of any kind should be managed through the books app, not through individual apps. However, I am getting ahead of myself. This being the first example of a book in a truly interactive format, we will see the genre and medium change and streamline over time. What a great way to interact with what we are reading, though! What do you think?

I still think I’d rather read a physical book, but this new format could push me to reading books in an electronic format. Just imagine a murder mystery like this!

New Fun Photos from the Library of Congress

One of the most interesting things that the Library of Congress has been up to over the past few months is their Flickr uploads. Their most recent uploads from the New York Herald are wonderful, and I’ll share some of my favorites below. Here’s a link to their photostream, where all these images come from:

Library of Congress’ Flickr Photostream

Have a great weekend!! (PS - These images have no copyright!)

Don’t Fear the e-reader

I read this very interesting article yesterday about e-readers, and I wanted to pass it along to you all:

Don’t Fear the e-reader, by Heather Michon

Top 10 Things That Are Being Killed Off By Digitalization

One of the most interesting library-related lists I have seen recently is this list:

Top 10 Things That Are Being Killed Off By Digitalization, by Richard.

That’s all I have today - you might also want to look at the discussion in the comments beneath that post - some good thoughts there. What do you think is being killed off by digitalization?

Digital Libraries

Since starting library school a few months ago, I am frequently asked about efforts to digitize, as well as share the information that libraries collectively hold. I could point these people to a few places, but this is the best summation I have seen, and I thought you might enjoy it.

Libraries and the Internet

Yesterday morning Josh Montgomery and I had a good discussion about the changing nature of both libraries and the internet. It started off with this thought from Josh:

The Internet > Libraries

Which led to a wide-ranging discussion about those two topics. They are frequently seen as mutually exclusive, like they are engaged in some sort of death match for information supremacy. I see this as not valid. I see the two entities as mutually beneficial. Both serve different, but fundamentally linked purposes.

The internet has become the de facto repository for much of the information that is produced by mankind in this age we live in. The ease of adding content to the internet is unrivaled, and couple that to the relative ease of sharing that information makes the internet the transforming hurricane of information that it has become. As a matter of fact, allow me to share with you a graphic I saw recently that puts the amount of information available on the internet in perspective:


Source: Mozy.

Yes, libraries have traditionally been repositories for information, but this too is changing. I think libraries, as well as librarians need to respect this new schema for information creation and sharing, as it is what the user has deemed best. But what is it that will make libraries stand out and apart from the internet in this information age? Service.

I feel sure that you, good reader, find the amount of information available on the internet bewildering, and maybe even a little frustrating. It’s ok, you are not alone. One way in which libraries can and are staying relevant in this information age is helping users filter out information they don’t need, or want, from their internet usage. For libraries and librarians totally ignored the internet would be unethical, and a terrible disservice to the patrons and users of the library. However, librarians have the skills to help individuals search the internet more effectively, and discover the “good” information they desire. Beyond that, libraries grant their patrons access to paid electronic databases that patrons could never afford on their own. These databases contain amazing amounts of data, but the search methods are all different, requiring the skills of a librarian.

Let me say it like this: The reason for the existence of libraries in this information age is not buildings, not books, and not even internet access. The reason why libraries are more relevant than ever before is the skills and services that librarians provide.

Allow me to provide you with a hypothetical example. When you search for something in Google, do you always find exactly what it is that you are looking for? Are the recommendations that Amazon makes for you to purchase always accurate and exactly what you want?

I would say no to this question.

Why is it that these methods of recommendations or information searching/discovery are flawed? Well, there are a couple of reasons why, I think. First, these systems are machines. They are not empathetic, they cannot ask detailed questions, and they do not have experience and a skillset to bring to bear on a problem. All they do is run rankings, track usage, and perform algorithms. Helpful as these may be (and I would say they are helpful, but not optimal) they do not take the place of a librarian in a reference interview, or doing reader’s advisory. Another reason why these machine run tools are less than optimally effective is that they serve a different purpose? What is the fundamental purpose of Google? To make money through advertising. The search tool is simply how they deliver that advertising. What is the problem with Amazon? Well, they sell books, CD’s, and movies - the traditional fare of libraries. But they also sell rakes. Amazon cannot focus on information needs like a librarian can. They, also, want to make money - but don’t really care how. It could be from a book, or some cosmetics.

I’ll refine my point a bit: Libraries are significant and important in this age because of the personal, human information services it provides.

As I mentioned above, libraries have books and other “information containers” as well - and internet search engines are terrible as searching this bibliographic data. There are systems online to effectively search this data - but they are designed, and the information maintained by who? Librarians.

Ok, so I feel like I am rambling a bit here, so let me sum up and move on. The internet is a great way to create, store, and share information of all kinds, good and bad. The internet is essential to our daily lives. But, the internet is not greater or better than libraries. The two support one another, with the internet providing a massive information resource and libraries providing the services and skills to navigate this massive amount of information. And the information in libraries includes not only electronic information, but also information in books, periodicals, music, and archives, most of which is not available online.

Near the end of our conversation, Josh asked me a question:
“If you had to destroy the internet or libraries, which would you destroy?”

I would destroy neither, if at all possible. However, if forced to choose, I would destroy the internet, because without libraries, I would be out of a job! I know that’s a bit selfish, so let me give you a better reason. The services the internet provides are replaceable, but the services libraries provide are not.

All of these thoughts are a great segue into tomorrow’s topic: How have libraries evolved over time? I’ll pick up some threads of this topic tomorrow as I talk about web 2.0 technologies and a new field/idea called Participatory Librarianship.

Good reader, if you made it through this post - give yourself a gold star!

- Jason Dean

The Kindle

Like many other Americans who love to read, I have been intrigued by Amazon’s electronic book reader, the Kindle. To be fair, I must admit I have never used one, only seen them in passing. However, the Kindle’s price ($359) makes me hesitant to run out and buy one just for the sake of trying it out. I’ve been browsing the internet to try and find a good review, and after reading several, I would like to share my thoughts.

First - I love books. For me, reading a book is both a visual, as well as a tactile experience. I love how the pages look and smell, the heft of the book in your hand, the noise of a page as you turn it. I also love to see them on our bookshelves - arranged neatly. I love the design of book covers, and the general graphic design of the book itself. So, to be fair, the idea of the Kindle is anathema to me.

Apparently, the Kindle works pretty well most of the time. It has trouble with the voice-reading option, and text occasionally does not parse properly. It’s fairly easy to read in the daytime, but has no backlight for nighttime reading. These are all things than can be solved by reading an actual, physical book.

But, for example, when Jen and I went overseas earlier this year it sure would have been nice to take our books (especially mine) over in a Kindle - much lighter and easier to carry. However, I am not clear if you can use it on an airplane or not.

As for me, I’ll pass on the Kindle. I do not think that books are going anywhere anytime soon.

- Jason Dean

Digitization and Libraries

Recently, I read a Wall Street Journal article online about one aspect of one of the major trends in Library Science today: digitization of manuscripts. There is a wide-ranging debate about this topic in Library Science fields, and I will try to give you a brief description of the situation.

Much like any debate, there are two sides. On one side, you have the group of people that say that digitization of books, etc. in libraries is bad, and perhaps even illegal. It could be illegal because of the copyright laws involved, and how libraries control the digital copies of their work. Also, some people say that there is some inherent quality to researching in a more old-fashioned way - using indices, etc to get what you need from a text. Google recently ran into many of the anti-digitization arguments when it announced that it would pair with Stanford University and “publish” digitized works online. If you would like a nice summation of the anti-digitization arguments, click on through to this link.

On the other side of the debate are the proponents for digitization. These folks say that digitization will better preserve the materials in libraries, while reducing physical space of the collection. Especially important to digitization, and also what the WSJ article was about, was the digitization (scanning) of rare and fragile works in order to preserve them. I think this is the best use for scanning - to preserve books, etc. in a readable format - before they disappear altogether. We can preserve some great and important works for future generations - even when the work has a limited physical lifetime.

But, nothing will ever replace holding a fine book in your hand - not even Amazon’s Kindle.