80 likes | 173 Views
Unfinished notes. From ELAG workshop 5 2007: Library 2.0: What is in a name?. Who needs it?. It is not really a question, unless we decide to fight it Which we do not Should we leave it to ”the others”? No, we would not like to do that Because then we will be marginalized
E N D
Unfinished notes From ELAG workshop 5 2007: Library 2.0: What is in a name?
Who needs it? • It is not really a question, unless we decide to fight it • Which we do not • Should we leave it to ”the others”? • No, we would not like to do that • Because then we will be marginalized • We have to take part! • So: Join ”them”
Trust • Do we trust the users? • As contributors of content • As subject cataloguers • Too choose their own suppliers of content and other services • Or just pretending to? • The general attitude is perhaps not very trusting • Should we?
Are they attracted by us? • We (the libraries) are offering a category of content not present on amazon.com • Attracting users is really a 1.0 thing • Visibility? • Who is clicking through whom? • Transparency vs invisibility
Multilingualism • Separating content from presentation helps • Social tagging might help • Automatic translation as an open service • E.g for translating queries
FRBR 2.0 • OAI-ORE meets FRBR • Social ”FRBRization” • Complement - not replace
Remember that • Library 2.0 offers us new possibilities to offer our services, helps us to increase our status, increase funding
We need to know more • About the actual user behaviour • Are the users really disappearing? • We need feedback!