I like wikis. Libraries should definitely be jumping on the wiki-bandwagon. User friendly, easy to maintain and change and grow, all the good stuff.
Here at SWC our readers' advisory group is working on a wiki we hope to share with the library eventually....we are only at the very early, planning stage right now. Will share when ready.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Wiki wikki wachee
So I checked out the PBCLS wiki and immediately found the "favorite books" page. I added a few of my favorites...okay, a dozen or so of my favorites. Very easy to do and oh yeah, I added the author to someone else's favorite, Gone with the Wind.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Folksonomies
I had to look this word up. This what Google found for me, in case anyone else wasn't familiar with that word either:
Definitions of Folksonomies on the Web:
Are collaboratively generated, open-ended labeling systems that enables Internet users to categorize content such as Web pages, online photographs ...www.infodiv.unimelb.edu.au/metadata/glossary.html
The tagging of content with metadata or information by users and community members based on their personal preferences. Folksonomies allow any user to add comments or information that other users can take advantage of when looking for or organizing their own information. ...plc.fis.utoronto.ca/tgdemo/Glossary.asp
Definitions of Folksonomies on the Web:
Are collaboratively generated, open-ended labeling systems that enables Internet users to categorize content such as Web pages, online photographs ...www.infodiv.unimelb.edu.au/metadata/glossary.html
The tagging of content with metadata or information by users and community members based on their personal preferences. Folksonomies allow any user to add comments or information that other users can take advantage of when looking for or organizing their own information. ...plc.fis.utoronto.ca/tgdemo/Glossary.asp
You say technorati, I say okay
Interesting. I learned that the BookBitchBlog has an authority of 20. Or 19, depends on which computer I use, oddly enough. I also enjoyed reading some of the comments. I didn't enjoy learning that someone is using the BookBitch name, however, as it is protected under copyright law. Will have to pursue that in my spare time...
It's del.ight.ful, it's del.icio.us, it's de.love.ly
Several years ago I tried to Digg my way to saving articles but ran into an annoying download, spamware-type problem. So I avoided the sharing networks and just greedily held on to my bookmarks in my Yahoo account.
Enter 23 Things, lucky #13. Reluctantly, I mosied around del.icio.us and decided to give it a try while I was at work. That way if there was any download, spam, spyware type issues, IT could take care of it. (you're welcome, Peter) But there wasn't. It worked like it should work, easily, simply, with a minimum of fuss and bother. So go check out my del.icio.us bookmarks on articles about a new blog that is a dream for Readers' Advisory & Collection Development, the Encyclopaedia Britannica going wiki, and Johnny Depp's brother writing a book.
Enter 23 Things, lucky #13. Reluctantly, I mosied around del.icio.us and decided to give it a try while I was at work. That way if there was any download, spam, spyware type issues, IT could take care of it. (you're welcome, Peter) But there wasn't. It worked like it should work, easily, simply, with a minimum of fuss and bother. So go check out my del.icio.us bookmarks on articles about a new blog that is a dream for Readers' Advisory & Collection Development, the Encyclopaedia Britannica going wiki, and Johnny Depp's brother writing a book.
Key differences between Web 1.0 & Web 2.0
An interesting, very informative article by Graham Cormode & Balachander Krishnamurthy, a couple of AT&T Labs employees. Not librarians, as far as I can tell yet they put together this very well researched, well written article. According to their abstract, web 2.0 started to be commonly used in around 2003-2004. That leads me to believe that the PBCLS has a 4-5 year lag on new technology. Which isn't as bad as the lag on Readers' Advisory, so I'm not complaining. Go forth and read:
Abstract:
Web 2.0 is a buzzword introduced in 2003–04 which is commonly used to encompass various novel phenomena on the World Wide Web. Although largely a marketing term, some of the key attributes associated with Web 2.0 include the growth of social networks, bi–directional communication, various ‘glue’ technologies, and significant diversity in content types. We are not aware of a technical comparison between Web 1.0 and 2.0. While most of Web 2.0 runs on the same substrate as 1.0, there are some key differences. We capture those differences and their implications for technical work in this paper. Our goal is to identify the primary differences leading to the properties of interest in 2.0 to be characterized. We identify novel challenges due to the different structures of Web 2.0 sites, richer methods of user interaction, new technologies, and fundamentally different philosophy. Although a significant amount of past work can be reapplied, some critical thinking is needed for the networking community to analyze the challenges of this new and rapidly evolving environment.
First Monday: Key differences between Web 1.0 & Web 2.0
About the authors:
Graham Cormode is a Principal Member of Technical Staff at AT&T Shannon Laboratories in New Jersey. Previously, he was a researcher at Bell Labs, after postdoctoral study at the DIMACS center in Rutgers University from 2002–2004. His PhD was granted by the University of Warwick in 2002. He works on social network analysis, large–scale data mining, and applied algorithms, with applications to databases, networks, and fundamentals of communications and computation.Web: http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/~graham/E–mail: graham [at] research [dot] att [dot] com
Balachander Krishnamurthy of AT&T Labs — Research has focused his research of late in the areas of online social networks, unwanted traffic, and Internet measurements. He has authored and edited ten books, published over 70 papers, and holds twenty patents. He has collaborated with over 75 researchers worldwide. His most recent book — Internet measurements: Infrastructure, traffic and applications (525 pp, John Wiley, with M. Crovella) — was published in July 2006. His earlier book — Web protocols and practice (672 pp, Addison–Wesley, with J. Rexford) — has been translated into Portuguese, Japanese, Russian, and Chinese. Bala is homepage–less but many of his papers can be found at http://www.research.att.com/~bala/papers. E–mail: bala [at] research [dot] att [dot] com
Abstract:
Web 2.0 is a buzzword introduced in 2003–04 which is commonly used to encompass various novel phenomena on the World Wide Web. Although largely a marketing term, some of the key attributes associated with Web 2.0 include the growth of social networks, bi–directional communication, various ‘glue’ technologies, and significant diversity in content types. We are not aware of a technical comparison between Web 1.0 and 2.0. While most of Web 2.0 runs on the same substrate as 1.0, there are some key differences. We capture those differences and their implications for technical work in this paper. Our goal is to identify the primary differences leading to the properties of interest in 2.0 to be characterized. We identify novel challenges due to the different structures of Web 2.0 sites, richer methods of user interaction, new technologies, and fundamentally different philosophy. Although a significant amount of past work can be reapplied, some critical thinking is needed for the networking community to analyze the challenges of this new and rapidly evolving environment.
First Monday: Key differences between Web 1.0 & Web 2.0
About the authors:
Graham Cormode is a Principal Member of Technical Staff at AT&T Shannon Laboratories in New Jersey. Previously, he was a researcher at Bell Labs, after postdoctoral study at the DIMACS center in Rutgers University from 2002–2004. His PhD was granted by the University of Warwick in 2002. He works on social network analysis, large–scale data mining, and applied algorithms, with applications to databases, networks, and fundamentals of communications and computation.Web: http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/~graham/E–mail: graham [at] research [dot] att [dot] com
Balachander Krishnamurthy of AT&T Labs — Research has focused his research of late in the areas of online social networks, unwanted traffic, and Internet measurements. He has authored and edited ten books, published over 70 papers, and holds twenty patents. He has collaborated with over 75 researchers worldwide. His most recent book — Internet measurements: Infrastructure, traffic and applications (525 pp, John Wiley, with M. Crovella) — was published in July 2006. His earlier book — Web protocols and practice (672 pp, Addison–Wesley, with J. Rexford) — has been translated into Portuguese, Japanese, Russian, and Chinese. Bala is homepage–less but many of his papers can be found at http://www.research.att.com/~bala/papers. E–mail: bala [at] research [dot] att [dot] com
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Encyclopaedia Britannica To Follow Modified Wikipedia Model
In a bid to wed the comprehensive, grassroots information factory of Wikipedia with the authority of the traditional encyclopedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica is opening the floodgates for online user submissions into its 240-year-old publication -- a move it long resisted and sniffed was akin to intellectual pollution.
What Britannica wants to do, on the other hand, is create "a welcoming community for scholars, experts, and lay contributors," it said in an announcement last week.
Read the full story here: Encyclopaedia Britannica To Follow Modified Wikipedia Model
What Britannica wants to do, on the other hand, is create "a welcoming community for scholars, experts, and lay contributors," it said in an announcement last week.
Read the full story here: Encyclopaedia Britannica To Follow Modified Wikipedia Model
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
