Friday, December 3, 2010
Muddiest Point for 12/7
Can you clarify what should be included in the "problem statement" of our DL report? Also, how does the "conceptual design" aspect of the report differ from the "schemas for representing and organizing digital objects"?
Readings for Week of 12/7
The Daily Times news piece author carries many of the same sentiments as I do regarding intellectual property. While it does serve its purpose for giving incentives to create, current IP laws also have a rather "chilling" effect on technological and cultural innovations for fear of rightsholder violations. It's so important that open access becomes the norm for certain information like computer source coding. Without allowing programmers to build off each other's work we wouldn't have the technology sources we have today, such as Unix operating systems and the internet itself.
The article related to Funding for Digital Libraries Research outlines the history of digital funding, especially for the National Science Foundation. It's easy to forget and take for granted how far along technology has come in terms of storage capabilities even compared to ten years ago. Something that struck me in the reading was how the NSF's budget for their supercomputer in the 90's, $60,000,000. When the article was written, in 2005, the capabilities of that supercomputer could be largely carried out by a small network of personal computers costing around $5,000. I wonder what those figures look like today.
The article in 2001 regarding the President’s Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) showed efforts on a grand governmental scale to highlight the importance of digitizing archives. The panel was addressed to the former President, G.W. Bush, suggesting that digital libraries are the future for expansion and provides an important framework for fostering education. This came at a time when Bush implemented his "No Child Left Behind" policies to the nation. While there were some good points to this article, such that public documents should be readily available through the Internet, the fact that it was implemented in response to one of Bush's worst policies taints the effort in my opinion.
The Clifford Lynch article was interesting, and I found one of his opening statements to be rather controversial: "...though some would argue that digital libraries have very little to do with libraries as institutions or the practice of librarianship." Just by taking this class it's easy to see the relevance of librarianship, especially metadata, controlled vocabularies, intellectual property concerns, and preservation and dissemination of information and documents to the application of digital libraries.
The article related to Funding for Digital Libraries Research outlines the history of digital funding, especially for the National Science Foundation. It's easy to forget and take for granted how far along technology has come in terms of storage capabilities even compared to ten years ago. Something that struck me in the reading was how the NSF's budget for their supercomputer in the 90's, $60,000,000. When the article was written, in 2005, the capabilities of that supercomputer could be largely carried out by a small network of personal computers costing around $5,000. I wonder what those figures look like today.
The article in 2001 regarding the President’s Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) showed efforts on a grand governmental scale to highlight the importance of digitizing archives. The panel was addressed to the former President, G.W. Bush, suggesting that digital libraries are the future for expansion and provides an important framework for fostering education. This came at a time when Bush implemented his "No Child Left Behind" policies to the nation. While there were some good points to this article, such that public documents should be readily available through the Internet, the fact that it was implemented in response to one of Bush's worst policies taints the effort in my opinion.
The Clifford Lynch article was interesting, and I found one of his opening statements to be rather controversial: "...though some would argue that digital libraries have very little to do with libraries as institutions or the practice of librarianship." Just by taking this class it's easy to see the relevance of librarianship, especially metadata, controlled vocabularies, intellectual property concerns, and preservation and dissemination of information and documents to the application of digital libraries.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Muddiest Point for 11/23
In Special Collections we have a university-developed software program that helps the non-programmer put finding aids and catalog records online. Called the Archivists' Toolkit, the software allows people who aren't familiar with writing EAD code to enter data in to the existing database. I was wondering if many larger institutions develop these types of applications to make it easier for everyone to contribute to online digital records.
Readings for Week of 11/23
The reading for Social Aspects of Digital Libraries is an interesting study because the panel workshop was put together to identify the social conditions that a digital library serves. The group organized their panel and participants by two variables of social needs regarding digital libraries; information needs, and end-user searching and filtering. Three facets of research study were also introduced: human, artifact, and system-centered. The study called for input from several areas and specialists in research development, so to better improve the relationships between each social aspect of a digital library.
The Infinite Library article isn't accessible in its entirety unless you have a subscription. The webpage is dated 2010, but I think the article is outdated, because at the end it notes that Harvard is one of the participants in Google's Print and Book Search project. I happen to remember from my copyright class that Harvard actually dropped out of the project and are now one of the voices concerning potential adverse library affects caused by the project. Nonetheless, the reader should draw from the article that Google's proposed plan both has potentially positive and negative implications for libraries. On the one hand, it would be great to have a portal from which millions of culturally important documents can be retrieved, but if (and when) it does become unnecessary for the information-seeker to visit the library to find relevant material, the library may face even more scrutiny for obsolescence.
Arms' article on differing viewpoints for a digital library provided a different approach to the study of DLs. It included viewpoint analysis, typically reserved for computer software programming, in the development of DLs. The article looks at the DL from three different viewpoints; the user, the organizational, and the technical. From examining these viewpoints, DL developers can account for structural and social aspects that both relate to the quality and usability of the digital library.
The Infinite Library article isn't accessible in its entirety unless you have a subscription. The webpage is dated 2010, but I think the article is outdated, because at the end it notes that Harvard is one of the participants in Google's Print and Book Search project. I happen to remember from my copyright class that Harvard actually dropped out of the project and are now one of the voices concerning potential adverse library affects caused by the project. Nonetheless, the reader should draw from the article that Google's proposed plan both has potentially positive and negative implications for libraries. On the one hand, it would be great to have a portal from which millions of culturally important documents can be retrieved, but if (and when) it does become unnecessary for the information-seeker to visit the library to find relevant material, the library may face even more scrutiny for obsolescence.
Arms' article on differing viewpoints for a digital library provided a different approach to the study of DLs. It included viewpoint analysis, typically reserved for computer software programming, in the development of DLs. The article looks at the DL from three different viewpoints; the user, the organizational, and the technical. From examining these viewpoints, DL developers can account for structural and social aspects that both relate to the quality and usability of the digital library.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Muddiest Point for 11/16
According to Saracevic, DL usability is not well-defined, nor are there specified criteria for evaluating it. I'm assuming this means there are no standards to follow when constructing DLs for usability, so what kind of sources for usability criteria could a person building a DL look to?
Readings for Interaction and Evaluation, 11/16
Unfortunately, the Arms Chapter 8 link would not open, as it seems it no longer exists at Cornell's site.
The Kling and Elliot article on digital library design defines cultural models for interpreting usability in digital libraries. They focus on two forms of DL usability; interface and organizational. It also discusses five models from which DL computer systems are generated, as incorporated by cultural models. There are also four dimensions of DLs that can be used to test interface usability: learnability; efficiency; memorability; and errors. The dimensions to test organizational usability are accessibility, compatibility, integrability in to work practices, and social-organizational expertise.
Saracevic's evaluation of DLs is based from 80 or so previous studies of DL evaluation. The focus was to isolate (or deconstruct) the studies based on their construct, context, criteria, and methods used for study. The author even goes on to group literature on DLs evaluation in two categories; meta (about literature), and object (on literature).
Scheiderman and Plaisant's chapter on interactive system usability emphasizes the importance of making digital objects appear simplistically, which is actually a very complicated process and takes more care than most people acknowledge. Nelson also goes in to some detail about the future of technology, and how the nature of digital information is transitioning to be mobile, such as in mobile apparatuses and the planting of computer chips under people's skin.
The Kling and Elliot article on digital library design defines cultural models for interpreting usability in digital libraries. They focus on two forms of DL usability; interface and organizational. It also discusses five models from which DL computer systems are generated, as incorporated by cultural models. There are also four dimensions of DLs that can be used to test interface usability: learnability; efficiency; memorability; and errors. The dimensions to test organizational usability are accessibility, compatibility, integrability in to work practices, and social-organizational expertise.
Saracevic's evaluation of DLs is based from 80 or so previous studies of DL evaluation. The focus was to isolate (or deconstruct) the studies based on their construct, context, criteria, and methods used for study. The author even goes on to group literature on DLs evaluation in two categories; meta (about literature), and object (on literature).
Scheiderman and Plaisant's chapter on interactive system usability emphasizes the importance of making digital objects appear simplistically, which is actually a very complicated process and takes more care than most people acknowledge. Nelson also goes in to some detail about the future of technology, and how the nature of digital information is transitioning to be mobile, such as in mobile apparatuses and the planting of computer chips under people's skin.
Muddiest Point from 11/9
Do website managers have to send their data from a closing site to archive.org in order for it to be archived, or is the site responsible for knowing which websites are to be closing so they may receive permission to archive?
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Readings for Preservation in Digital Libraries, 11/9
Rieger's article on digitization efforts on a mass scale examines four major digital library efforts: Google Book Search; Microsoft; Open Content Alliance; and the Million Book Project. Dated February 2008, this article is a bit outdated since Microsoft has since abandoned their digitization project just a few months after this article was published. Nonetheless, it is still a great examination of some of the implications of digitizing on such a grand scale as these efforts. It analyzes the frameworks in which such a collection should be established, assesses related preservation issues, and provides recommendations for the development of such initiatives.
Hedstrom's article on archiving and preservation of digital libraries identifies problems associated with preserving digital resources. She calls for new preservation technologies that go beyond the reach of traditional preservation methods of research materials. She notes that because digital collections often grow at a rate that makes it difficult to manage and store them, current conceptual models need reexamination.
Brian Lavoie's Open Archival Information System Reference Model serves as a guideline for those interested in preserving and providing access to digitized documents. He defines the archival information system as “an organization of people and systems that has accepted the responsibility to preserve information and make it available for a Designated Community.” The guideline is designed to be an open public forum for individuals to participate and contribute to the initiative.
I will update with the other readings soon.
Hedstrom's article on archiving and preservation of digital libraries identifies problems associated with preserving digital resources. She calls for new preservation technologies that go beyond the reach of traditional preservation methods of research materials. She notes that because digital collections often grow at a rate that makes it difficult to manage and store them, current conceptual models need reexamination.
Brian Lavoie's Open Archival Information System Reference Model serves as a guideline for those interested in preserving and providing access to digitized documents. He defines the archival information system as “an organization of people and systems that has accepted the responsibility to preserve information and make it available for a Designated Community.” The guideline is designed to be an open public forum for individuals to participate and contribute to the initiative.
I will update with the other readings soon.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Muddiest Point
Muddiest Point: I remember Z39.50 being briefly introduced in my organizing and retrieving info class, but for some reason I associated it with MARC records. Is there a place in MARC fields that specifies Z39.50 standards?
Readings for Access in Digital Libraries Part II (10/26)
The Chapter regarding definitions and origins of the Open Archive Initiative I believe to be important for anyone considering librarianship as a career. Digitizing documents is both time consuming and expensive, especially for the equipment, so it's fundamentally a good thing that libraries can share documents through tools like the OAI. Not only does it disseminate information to a larger audience, but non-programming librarians can have a better concept of technical concepts related to digital collections. Also, the importance of useful metadata should not be over-exaggerated, which is the overarching goal of the OAI; to provide descriptive metadata.
The Todd Miller article on federated searching seems to be unavailable through the Library Journal's archives, as the link no longer works, and I tried (unsuccessfully) to locate it on my own.
The article by Clifford Lynch regarding Z39.50 standards is very useful to the technical side of librarianship. The standard, developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), is used to specify data structures and rules applied to database searching that allows a client to retrieve records from a server machine. First developed in the 1980's, the most current version of Z39.50 was adopted in 1995, and sometimes referred to as version 3. Basically, the standard is meant for compatibility reading between the client and server alone, and doesn't accommodate third parties. One key aspect to remember, is that the standard doesn't deal with any database management or user interface issues, but simply the protocol interaction between the two machines.
The article by Norbert Lossau was a refreshing break from all the computer-tech jargon of the previous articles. Examining an issue of grand proportions for academic libraries, Lossau notes the importance of relevant search strategies for digital documents. He stresses the importance of libraries taking control of developing meaningful search engines, so that they don't get left behind in the digital shadow of giants like Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo. Something that struck me in the reading was his mention of a survey conducted in November 2002, noting that students still make extensive use of online library database searching, but would much rather do it through interfaces like Google's. I found this especially interesting, because most people need at least minimal training to effectively navigate through digital library catalogs. Google's algorithm eliminates the need for Boolean search strategies like using AND and OR, and doesn't need to specify fields like "author," although there are useful applications of such strategies.
The Todd Miller article on federated searching seems to be unavailable through the Library Journal's archives, as the link no longer works, and I tried (unsuccessfully) to locate it on my own.
The article by Clifford Lynch regarding Z39.50 standards is very useful to the technical side of librarianship. The standard, developed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), is used to specify data structures and rules applied to database searching that allows a client to retrieve records from a server machine. First developed in the 1980's, the most current version of Z39.50 was adopted in 1995, and sometimes referred to as version 3. Basically, the standard is meant for compatibility reading between the client and server alone, and doesn't accommodate third parties. One key aspect to remember, is that the standard doesn't deal with any database management or user interface issues, but simply the protocol interaction between the two machines.
The article by Norbert Lossau was a refreshing break from all the computer-tech jargon of the previous articles. Examining an issue of grand proportions for academic libraries, Lossau notes the importance of relevant search strategies for digital documents. He stresses the importance of libraries taking control of developing meaningful search engines, so that they don't get left behind in the digital shadow of giants like Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo. Something that struck me in the reading was his mention of a survey conducted in November 2002, noting that students still make extensive use of online library database searching, but would much rather do it through interfaces like Google's. I found this especially interesting, because most people need at least minimal training to effectively navigate through digital library catalogs. Google's algorithm eliminates the need for Boolean search strategies like using AND and OR, and doesn't need to specify fields like "author," although there are useful applications of such strategies.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Week 6 Muddiest Point
From part two of the Hawking article: "There is a strong economic incentive for search engines to use caching to reduce the cost of answering queries."
I would like clarification about what is involved in this process, and what caching really is. I just thought it was like cookies that are sent to individual IPs and stored on the server until deleted.
I would like clarification about what is involved in this process, and what caching really is. I just thought it was like cookies that are sent to individual IPs and stored on the server until deleted.
Week 6 Readings
The article by Henzinger et al., Challenges in Web Search Engines, examines some problems with search engines that I never considered before. Of course, it's obvious with all the advertisements popping up on the query result pages that money runs the operation, and the more you have, the more people will see your website. I was unaware of the term "spam" being applied to search engines, however. As with some algorithms, the most popular web pages appear first in the query list. With others, it appears authors and publishers of these sites have bought their ticket to popularity, which will ultimately lead to more links to that page by all other algorithms.
Part One of the Hawking article focuses on generic terms related to web searches. While I found some of his diagrams to be a little confusing, he supports them with several definitions, such as URL, crawling, indexes, spamming, and hashing function as they apply to search engines. He spends a great deal of time examining web crawling and various forms of crawling, which filters previously generated search results from the same and related queries. The second part of this article examines the process indexing by crawling by search engines, namely Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft (GYM). Typically, there are two steps to indexing by algorithms. First, the "indexer" scans the text of documents. Next, it sorts the numbered results by "inversion" in term number order, with the document secondarily numbered. Hawking also describes processes later in the indexing process, such as scaling and compression, for ease of storage.
Part One of the Hawking article focuses on generic terms related to web searches. While I found some of his diagrams to be a little confusing, he supports them with several definitions, such as URL, crawling, indexes, spamming, and hashing function as they apply to search engines. He spends a great deal of time examining web crawling and various forms of crawling, which filters previously generated search results from the same and related queries. The second part of this article examines the process indexing by crawling by search engines, namely Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft (GYM). Typically, there are two steps to indexing by algorithms. First, the "indexer" scans the text of documents. Next, it sorts the numbered results by "inversion" in term number order, with the document secondarily numbered. Hawking also describes processes later in the indexing process, such as scaling and compression, for ease of storage.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Assignment #2b
Here is the URL for images I changed in resolution:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54552457@N04/sets/72157624972182591/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54552457@N04/sets/72157624972182591/
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Week 5 Muddiest Point
The Ogbuji article lists several sources for XML tutorials and guides, and several seem to have similar content. I wonder which one would be recommended for the type of work related to this class.
Week 5 Readings
The Martin Bryan article talked about BURKS, the Brighton University Resource Kit for Students, which from 1997-2001 provided students of computing who had little or no internet access the necessary resources for learning different programming languages. While the collection dropped in sales once broadband internet became readily available, the tutorials still offer a dictionary of computing terms and a copy of the Mandrake 8.0 Linux distribution.
The next article, by Uche Oqbuji, gives a pretty well defined list of sources and tutorials to go to for XML. The lsit of technologies included XML 1.0, XML introduction tutorials, catalogs, namespaces, XML base, XInclude, among other standards. I will definitely keep this article handy for future reference when it comes to XML standards and tutorials for beginners. From my understanding, it would seem that Schematron would be a useful tool because you don't have to start from the root nodes and work your way up.
The tutorial by Bergholz was also informative to the XML beginner, as he explains the functionality of XML to the final product. He also mentions the basic structure of SGML and how HTML is written to markup the appearance of a document, and has nothing to do with the content.
The XML Schema Tutorial shows the nature of XML structure. It also explained the nature of the applied elements in the structure, and the functionality of specific commands.
The next article, by Uche Oqbuji, gives a pretty well defined list of sources and tutorials to go to for XML. The lsit of technologies included XML 1.0, XML introduction tutorials, catalogs, namespaces, XML base, XInclude, among other standards. I will definitely keep this article handy for future reference when it comes to XML standards and tutorials for beginners. From my understanding, it would seem that Schematron would be a useful tool because you don't have to start from the root nodes and work your way up.
The tutorial by Bergholz was also informative to the XML beginner, as he explains the functionality of XML to the final product. He also mentions the basic structure of SGML and how HTML is written to markup the appearance of a document, and has nothing to do with the content.
The XML Schema Tutorial shows the nature of XML structure. It also explained the nature of the applied elements in the structure, and the functionality of specific commands.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Week 3 Readings/Muddiest Point
Lesk:
The reading focused on representation of documents in a digital setting. It talked about scanning, and brought to my attention digital character recognition. I would like to learn more about this technology since I feel it may have great implications on the future of digitizing objects.
Arms:
This reading explained several types of technologies and languages used to create digital documents, such as HTML, XML, SGML, and CSS. I had previous experience with CSS in LIS2600, where we used the Cascading Style Sheets to create inline and external style sheets. For some reason, reading about the standards and languages seems more difficult than actually applying the rules to the technology. I learn best by doing, but this reading did a pretty good job in describing these principles.
Lynch:
This article focuses on explaining the role of identifiers in the online environment. What makes the internet possible are links that are connected by nodes. Each link must have a unique characteristic to set it apart from the rest, and to make it searchable. For a webpage the URL acts as the identifier. For books and other consumer commodities, the ISBN gives an object a unique identity. Without these "handles" in place, digital documents would be impossible to independently identify, as they exist in a ubiquitous environment.
Paskin:
This reading was also about identifiers, but more focused on the technical aspects in relation to digital libraries. The reading describes DOI identifiers and how they make objects classifiable and distinctive to a researcher. Some of the technical aspects included syntax recognition, along with resolution and metadata components.
Muddiest Point:
I suppose SGML is a concept I could use better clarification on. For example, what are the main differences between SGML and XML?
The reading focused on representation of documents in a digital setting. It talked about scanning, and brought to my attention digital character recognition. I would like to learn more about this technology since I feel it may have great implications on the future of digitizing objects.
Arms:
This reading explained several types of technologies and languages used to create digital documents, such as HTML, XML, SGML, and CSS. I had previous experience with CSS in LIS2600, where we used the Cascading Style Sheets to create inline and external style sheets. For some reason, reading about the standards and languages seems more difficult than actually applying the rules to the technology. I learn best by doing, but this reading did a pretty good job in describing these principles.
Lynch:
This article focuses on explaining the role of identifiers in the online environment. What makes the internet possible are links that are connected by nodes. Each link must have a unique characteristic to set it apart from the rest, and to make it searchable. For a webpage the URL acts as the identifier. For books and other consumer commodities, the ISBN gives an object a unique identity. Without these "handles" in place, digital documents would be impossible to independently identify, as they exist in a ubiquitous environment.
Paskin:
This reading was also about identifiers, but more focused on the technical aspects in relation to digital libraries. The reading describes DOI identifiers and how they make objects classifiable and distinctive to a researcher. Some of the technical aspects included syntax recognition, along with resolution and metadata components.
Muddiest Point:
I suppose SGML is a concept I could use better clarification on. For example, what are the main differences between SGML and XML?
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Week 2 Readings/Muddiest Point
In A Framework for Building Open DL's, the authors focused on standards and definitions for interoperability in DLs. Due to differing philosophies between computer scientists, library scientists, and networked information systems regarding digital libraries, there need to be certain standards that each discipline can follow to acheive similar interests. Among the metadata standards that are broad enough in nature to be applied to these categories are Dublin Core and DAI-PMH.
The article An Architecture for Information in DL's primarily focuses on the structure of information and types of digital objects, including data, metadata, and the unique identifier, or handle. The components of a digital library consist of the user interface, the search system, handle system, and repository. The structure of information in DL's has to do with the relationships between the materials. I took this to mean the relationship of words, metadata, and handles to each other to make an item searchable in the query. The article also examined the different formats, versions, and rights and permissions that information objects within a digital library consist of. As a side note, the handle examples in the text remind me of IP addressing.
Interoperability for Digital Objects and Repositories uses the case study of the Cornell/CNRI collaboration to examine the effectiveness of interoperability standards. In order for each system to work together, the handle system must be built to accommodate interoperability. The study wanted to focus more on standard definitions of interoperability to test their results.
Muddiest Point:
For the term/group project we are to have an example of other data formats, such as photo. Are we to create at least one out of the three collections in just that digital format? Or integrate at least one photo in each of the three collections?
The article An Architecture for Information in DL's primarily focuses on the structure of information and types of digital objects, including data, metadata, and the unique identifier, or handle. The components of a digital library consist of the user interface, the search system, handle system, and repository. The structure of information in DL's has to do with the relationships between the materials. I took this to mean the relationship of words, metadata, and handles to each other to make an item searchable in the query. The article also examined the different formats, versions, and rights and permissions that information objects within a digital library consist of. As a side note, the handle examples in the text remind me of IP addressing.
Interoperability for Digital Objects and Repositories uses the case study of the Cornell/CNRI collaboration to examine the effectiveness of interoperability standards. In order for each system to work together, the handle system must be built to accommodate interoperability. The study wanted to focus more on standard definitions of interoperability to test their results.
Muddiest Point:
For the term/group project we are to have an example of other data formats, such as photo. Are we to create at least one out of the three collections in just that digital format? Or integrate at least one photo in each of the three collections?
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Week 1 Readings/Muddiest Point
Setting Foundations-DELOS Manifesto
This article focuses on the evolving meaning of the term 'Digital Library'. No longer a content-centric, digital libraries have become person-centric, meaning there no longer are barriers to information available in an online setting. Previous collection models existed in a static environment, but today, digital libraries offer a dynamic interaction between users and their search for information. The DELOS Manifesto aims to establish principles for digital library environments to follow. According to the Manifesto, Digital libraries operate within a three-tiered network: Digital Library Management Systems; Digital Library Systems; and the Digital Library. The managment system involves providing necessary software to form the infrastructure for both the Digital Library System and the Digital Library itself. The Digital Library system provides the software that provides the architectural structure of the Digital Library, and the Digital Library is the space where users manipulate search queries to obtain content held within.
Dewey Meets Turing
This article explains the relationship between computer scientists and librarians with respect to digital libraries. In the mid-1990's, computer scientists saw digital libraries as an answer to many in-depth, "pure" research projects, while librarians saw them as an answer to their institution's funding problems, as the scientific community largely generated grants to fund research. The advent of the World Wide Web drastically changed the dynamics of this relationship. The web undermined the common ground for computer scientists and librarians in that the distinction between consumers and producers of information became drastically blurred. For libraries, access to information changed as publishers drove up costs to digital content, while computer scientists enjoyed the linkability of networks that the web provided. This new phenomenon changed the relationship between computer scientists and librarians; now librarians perceive computer scientists as having 'hijacked' monetary funds for collection development, while computer scientists don't understand why algorithms can't replace metadata formulated by librarians, and why librarians can't be replaced by computer scientists themselves.
Muddiest Point
I see on another person's blog there was a third reading for this week, which I am currently unable to locate on Courseweb. I will continue to look for it and update this blog accordingly.
This article focuses on the evolving meaning of the term 'Digital Library'. No longer a content-centric, digital libraries have become person-centric, meaning there no longer are barriers to information available in an online setting. Previous collection models existed in a static environment, but today, digital libraries offer a dynamic interaction between users and their search for information. The DELOS Manifesto aims to establish principles for digital library environments to follow. According to the Manifesto, Digital libraries operate within a three-tiered network: Digital Library Management Systems; Digital Library Systems; and the Digital Library. The managment system involves providing necessary software to form the infrastructure for both the Digital Library System and the Digital Library itself. The Digital Library system provides the software that provides the architectural structure of the Digital Library, and the Digital Library is the space where users manipulate search queries to obtain content held within.
Dewey Meets Turing
This article explains the relationship between computer scientists and librarians with respect to digital libraries. In the mid-1990's, computer scientists saw digital libraries as an answer to many in-depth, "pure" research projects, while librarians saw them as an answer to their institution's funding problems, as the scientific community largely generated grants to fund research. The advent of the World Wide Web drastically changed the dynamics of this relationship. The web undermined the common ground for computer scientists and librarians in that the distinction between consumers and producers of information became drastically blurred. For libraries, access to information changed as publishers drove up costs to digital content, while computer scientists enjoyed the linkability of networks that the web provided. This new phenomenon changed the relationship between computer scientists and librarians; now librarians perceive computer scientists as having 'hijacked' monetary funds for collection development, while computer scientists don't understand why algorithms can't replace metadata formulated by librarians, and why librarians can't be replaced by computer scientists themselves.
Muddiest Point
I see on another person's blog there was a third reading for this week, which I am currently unable to locate on Courseweb. I will continue to look for it and update this blog accordingly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)