The World eBook Fair begins this Saturday, July 4th, coinciding with Project Gutenberg’s 39th anniversary.

To celebrate, the World eBook Fair members are providing free access to over two million books between July 4th and August 4th.

found via ResourceShelf

In a merging of two of my great interests, NASA has issued a Request For Information (ROI) on how best to “analyze and catalog notes from spaceflight pioneer Wernher von Braun into an electronic, searchable database or other system.“

Sample Page from Von Braun's Notes

At first glance, this is something that would be solved by using library tools and software.  However, the list of potential ways to set this up seems to illustrate the gaps in library technology (all points are mine):

• Users should be able to see the notes as they exist.
• The text in the notes, as well as all labels and notations, should be fully keyword searchable.
• All elements of the notes, including text, formulas, diagrams, etc. should be able to be targeted and described in a way that allows for keyword searching.  This includes “tagging”, but also commentary, description and critique.
• Users should be able to define relationships (create links) between ideas within the notes, as well as documents and other resources from other collections.  For instance, someone seeking information on the Saturn V Engine Bell should find all drawings, notes, diagrams, and formulas within the notes, as well as outside resources relating to all of these.

This project begs for a combination of a traditional database (for storing and searching text) with the added functionality provided by social software products.  Nothing in the list is beyond the current means of technology… think  of a wiki combined with flickr-type functionality that can utilize PDF documents and you have a good starting point.

Why hasn’t this been done?  How many libraries and archives have document sets like this that could become a researcher’s favorite collection, with the right application of technology?  Have any been digitized with a social annotation feature?

Why do I suspect that the development of this will come from outside the library community?  We should already have projects that utilize this kind of mash-up philosophy… our collections could be so much more powerful.

There are some great things being done in the library technology realm, and many people and projects that are worth praising.  But now and then I see something like this and wonder how we missed this obvious application of existing technologies.

found via ResourceShelf and Wired Science

What is the future of the library? is a video that presents the library as a solution to the digitial divide, providing access and empowerment to those who otherwise would not have the access or the ability to effectively utilize the internet.

At first the video may seem to be all about buzzwords, but by the end you should have some thought-provoking questions forming within your mind.  I recommend at least two viewings, and quite a bit of time to think about where we might be headed.

This is a great example of asking excellent questions in order to move the conversation forward.

found via The Proverbial Lone Wolf Librarian

The Review Board on Principles of Shared Data Creation and Stewardship has released their final report on OCLC’s proposed policy for use of records (pdf), and after reviewing the report, OCLC has formally withdrawn the policy.

This conclusion to the records policy proposal is the best that could be imagined.  OCLC has listened to criticism from the greater library community, considered both the policy and it’s criticism through the efforts of the Review Board, and has responded in a way that allows everyone to move forward with a greater understanding of how best to go about updating the policy.

I suggested early on that OCLC was a tiger, instinctively defending its territory.  This still feels like a proper metaphor:  the movement towards creating a policy without proper input from the library community, and the subsequent review and withdrawing of the policy, seems more like an organization that didn’t realize the true implications of what it was putting in place, as opposed to one that was attempting a power grab to create a monopoly.

This was, and remains, a critical issue for libraries.  The ability to use the metadata representing our collections (as well as connecting them to collections and resources beyond what we own) is critical to our future ability to offer services in ways that will serve our patrons best.

I certainly hope that OCLC sets up a policy creation board similar to the review board – one that seeks a wide a range of ideas, opinion and input.  This will ensure a policy that takes a broader and more complete view of the use of cataloging records, but will also strengthen OCLC, because a membership organization is stronger when the constituent members are consistently heard and respected.  This has happened with the Review Board, and if OCLC continues to encourage it, everyone will come out ahead.

To OCLC:  You have responded well, and in the process have created an opportunity to solidify your position as a membership organization.  Keep up the good work and you will benefit, along with your members.

To the Review Board:  The report is well-written, and does an excellent job of stating what was wrong with the policy (and the process of creating the policy), as well as providing a constructive means to create a new policy that will properly reflect the needs and desires of the membership as a whole.

To detractors of the policy:  Those who offered strong, but constructive, criticism deserve recognition.  This was an emotional debate, and keeping focused on the issues at hand has ultimately won the day.  The best, and most complete, resource of commentary and information is the Code4Lib OCLC Policy Change page.

This has been an education for all involved:  the power of sustained commentary, of constructive criticism, of listening as well as talking, and of reviewing and changing positions when necessary.  Everyone should keep it up.

resources:  ResourceShelf & Disruptive Library Technology Jester

The American Libraries article is just one of many to explain the issues facing Ohio, but I found the following information worth posting:

Strickland’s office was also flooded with phone calls; gubernatorial spokesperson Amanda Wurst said in the June 23 Toledo Blade that “there were 1,356 calls through our switchboard, 80% of which were regarding library funding.” On a normal day, the office receives 150 calls, she added.

On another front, Save Ohio Libraries has created a Flyer for tomorrow’s Statehouse rally in Columbus (Pdf):

Save Ohio Libraries Rally Flyer

Odds and Ends:

Save Ohio Libraries is the rallying cry as well as the focus of this week’s activities.

The Save Ohio Libraries Facebook page is rapidly approaching 12,000 members (and has gone from 11,543 to 11,768 as I have written this post).  If you are a FB member, add to that number.  Also, become a fan of Governor Ted Strickland and post a message on his board.  As events around the world in recent months have shown, social networking has an impact, and one of the ways to have an impact is a large group of people all taking a step in the same direction.

Rallies are being planned in Cleveland, Cincinnati, Centerville, London, Portsmouth, and (just organized tonight) Columbus.  If you can add a few bodies to the gatherings, do so!

One additional thought to add to this:  this is growing beyond Ohio.  There are many people from other states who are watching this with concern and support.  The success or failure of these efforts (both the efforts to drastically reduce library funding to help balance the state’s budget, as well as our efforts to preserve library services) will make it easier/harder for other states to do the same.  Broadcasting the understanding that cutting library services only hurts recovery efforts by the states will not only benefit libraries across the country, but will also benefit the overall economy.

Make yourself heard!

Shorpy is a collection of photographs presented using a blog, but it is an especially captivating collection.  A combination of historical photographs, found images, and personal/family photos, there is rarely an entry that doesn’t hold some interest for the viewer.

I especially like the pictures with an element of mystery… the attempt to gain some context of what is happening or where/when the photograph was taken.

found via Librarians’ Internet Index

Here are two quick and effective ways for Ohioans to contact the Governor’s office and convey our thoughts on the library aspect of the budget crisis:

Contact the Governor is a standard contact form that resides on the official governor’s web site.

Ted Strickland’s FaceBook Page is amazing at this moment… there seems to be miles of supportive library comments posted on his wall.  Every single post is about library funding.  If you are a member of FB, I suggest that you consider adding your thoughts to the list.  Note that you have to “Become a supporter” in order to post a comment, but the most important criticism should come from those who support you.

Here is what I posted in both spaces:

Governor Strickland:  Please recognize that libraries allow those with limited means to access information and technology.  To severely cut funding at the same time that circumstances are pushing more people into the “limited means” category will only delay (and perhaps suppress) Ohio’s recovery.  Libraries do not expect to be exempted from budget cuts, but the severe level of the cuts means that many services and locations will not survive, just when people will need them the most.

Note that I do not suggest that libraries not face any budget cuts.  This is a statewide crisis, with many causes, and it will require intelligent and shared sacrifices by many.  To not expect any cuts would be unrealistic.  To implement modest cuts, combined with options to more effectively and efficiently serve patrons, could transform this into a win-win scenario.

I feel that there is a great deal of room for increased efficiency in library operations, especially when it comes to technology.  There are efforts to do this on a multi-state level, which is a solid step in the right direction.  Other steps can be taken statewide to save money and increase participation.  Efforts to find and implement technological efficiency at individual libraries themselves can provide greater service and budgetary savings in the long term.

A few items of note to update yesterday’s post:

The Library is Now Closed (a.k.a. Shuttered Library) is a blog created by an Ohio librarian named Mike (didn’t see a last name) which is compiling links to a vast amount of information and resources for libraries and supporters in Ohio. (thanks Jessamyn!)

Save Ohio Libraries is a blog detailing actions that people and libraries can take to, as the title suggests, save Ohio libraries.

A couple of additional links to Pdf articles that I missed yesterday, both from the “Balanced Budget Framework” page.  Note that neither of these have been properly named; save them to your hard drive and add “.pdf” to the end of the file name so that your computer will know how to open them (or you can open your Pdf reader and open the files from the program’s “File” menu):

• Balance Sheet by Line Item (detailed budget information, including the Governor, Senate, and House versions of  budget allocations)
• Highlighted State Strategies (a list of a dozen states, with their approaches towards balancing their respective budgets)

It’s happening, folks.  State and local budgets are under extreme pressure, and tough decisions are being made by Governors, state officials, countys counties, towns and taxing districts.  Libraries that rely on public funding are now almost certainly facing severe cuts.

In Ohio, state funding for libraries is facing a proposed $227 million cut over the next two years… a nearly 50% cut.  Ohio’s libraries happen to be, for interesting historical reasons (Pdf), very reliant on state-level funding for their operations.

When one reads Governor Strickland’s budget statement, as well as the overview of affects on various agencies (Pdf), it becomes obvious that the cuts are being shared by many agencies that will have trouble absorbing them (Pdf), and that most will have to significantly scale back services in order to survive at all.

Think about your library’s budget… what percentage of it could disappear before you would face staff cuts, reduced hours, and elimination of programs?  I suspect that these effects would appear well before the 50% mark.  When one considers that funding to supporting organizations (such as OhioLink) is also being cut, the impact may be greater still.

At what point would the basic operation of your library be at stake?  This number is different for every library, as it depends on your physical presence (building size, layout, holdings, etc.) as well as staff training.  Cross-trained staff who have a good overall sense of the many facets of a dynamic library are able to provide far more services for their salaries than those who are compartmentalized.

What can be done?  At this point, the options are limited.  Library administrators will soon be forced to simply react to events, and have lost the window of opportunity to make anticipatory changes in their organization.  When I wrote about this last January, I was guessing that the effects would be most pronounced in the 2010-11 budget cycle (instead of this one).  California, and now Ohio, suggest that things are happening faster than many anticipated.

What can we do at our libraries?  Make it clear to those you serve, as well as those who fund you, what is at stake.  Whatever changes you make, let them know what you are doing, and why.  If you eliminate services, or reduce hours, or cut staff, that information needs to be disseminated, if only to lay a foundation for restoring them in the future.  When you find a way to save or restore a service, or more effectively utilize staff time and ability (see below), this needs to be conveyed, as well.

Of greater importance, undertake an assessment of your organization’s abilities.  Find out what the library staff can do, and what your resources truly are.  By effectively applying their skills, you likely can make better use of your staff than you currently are.  Find out what can be cut from the budget that can be done for less simply by utilizing less expensive resources and well-applied staff time.

Laying off a staff position will save a given block of money.  Eliminating the outsourcing of a service that costs even more, but can be done by that person in 15-20 hours per week, creates a win-win situation for your library.  There are many victories to be had in the line items of your budget.  The question remains:  is there time to find and implement them?

The fundamental approach to this has to be dynamic… anticipate changes, and be prepared to adapt.  The most adaptable area of your library is the people who do the work.  If everyone works together, sacrifices together, strives to find ways to save money by better utilizing their skills and time… if all of this can happen at your library, you have a much better chance to ride this out.

found on LISNews

If you are involved with the selection or ordering process, then you are very likely to be familiar with searching for items by the International Standard Book Number, or ISBN.  The newer, 13-digit ISBN is actually based on the European Article Number, or EAN, which makes books consistent with most international trade goods.  The EAN was developed as an expansion of the common Universal Product Code, or UPC.

Enough theory?  How about web sites that offer lookup services that can help you find booksellers, prices, and even reviews and summaries of the books you wish to acquire?

• BookFinder – This site returns a large number of booksellers (many, many used booksellers!), although it seems odd that it doesn’t display the book’s title.
• CheckUPC.com – A good summary, and a variety of printable bar codes make this a decent site for book information.
• ISBN.nu – This is one I have used for years, and is still the one I turn to when our primary vendors don’t have a book in stock.
• ISBNdb.com – With summaries, subjects, similar items, and physical details, this site is a great resource for information about books.
• OCLC’s xISBN service – This service returns a list of related ISBNs, other editions of the book whose ISBN you append to their base URL ( http://xisbn.worldcat.org/webservices/xid/isbn/ ), in XML format.  It isn’t pretty, but when you need it, it is very helpful.
• ThingISBN – Similar to xISBN, LibraryThing provides a service where you append your ISBN to the end of their base URL ( http://www.librarything.com/api/thingISBN/ ) and get a list of related ISBNs in XML format.
• UPC Database – This site returns a large number of booksellers of the group; it also lets you know that the UPC is associated with that fictional country that so many people enjoy visiting:  Bookland.
• Wikipedia’s Book Sources – If you want a service that can give you dozens (and dozens!) of places where you can “Find This Book”, then you need to try this one.

For comparison, here are links to results for the same book (Stephen King : The Dark Tower):

• BookFinder.com
• CheckUPC.com
• ISBN.nu
• ISBNdb.com
• OCLC’s xISBN service
• ThingISBN
• UPC Database
• Wikipedia’s Book Sources

Sources and further information:

• Bibliographic Wilderness (and again)
• Comparing xISBN and ThingISBN (FRBR Blog)
• Official Web Site of The Dark Tower (The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed….)

About Herbs, Botanicals, & Other Products has been launched by the Memorial Sloan-Ketterling Cancer Center.

This is a great starting point for finding definitive information on medical use of many nature-derived products and natural healing techniques, including:

• Zinc (and many other vitamins and minerals)
• Willow Bark
• Massage Therapy

The alphabetical list of their articles is a great starting point.  The articles focus on cancer treatment, but the information and resources will offer insight for a broad range of questions.

found via ResourceShelf

Love that New Book Smell?  Or do you prefer Classic Musty Smell?  Perhaps your preference leans towards Crunchy Bacon or Cats?

Smell Of Books has got your scent (and Sensibility!).

found via LISNews

Today, 12 June 2009, would have been Anne Frank’s 80th birthday.  I think that’s worth a moment of reflection, don’t you?

found via LISNews

Blogs Falling in an Empty Forest is a New York Times article about blogging, specifically about the study showing an estimated 95% of blogs have not been updated in over 4 months.

Does this signal an end to blogging?  The death of a communication tool?  Not at all.  As the article points out, much of the information conveyed through blogging can also be conveyed through other tools, such as Facebook and Twitter.

As with all tools, users will seek out the tool that best fits their task (or at least the best that fits their skill set, and will still accomplish the task).  Blogging was an early “web 2.0″ tool, and was adopted and adapted to serve many purposes.  Through a combination of better tools for specific tasks, loss of interest/time/support for the creators, and the limits of readers to follow more than a given number of blogs on a particular topic, it is no surprise that many blogs are going into hibernation.

There is also a discussion regarding the expectations of the blogger.  If one strives for fame, fortune and glory, go for it… but a majority of bloggers will not achieve that level.  I suspect that more than a few people set goals beyond what the market could provide their particular skill set and audience.

When I set out to start blogging, I simply wanted to utilize a forum that would allow me to collect thoughts and ideas that I felt were important, and to use it to organize my own interests and actions, as well as to convey what I posted to those who might be interested.  Over time the focus has expanded to include more of my thoughts and ideas (I still cringe a bit when using the word “I”), but still focuses on what is happening in the library technology world.

Blogging has been harder to maintain than I originally thought, but it has also been far more rewarding.  I am still searching for the balance between all of the activities that demand attention, but I suspect that Libology will remain in the “active” category for some time.

found via ResourceShelf

Web 3.0 Concepts Explained in Plain English is a collection of presentations, all striving to describe the next phase of web activity and development.  If all you look at is the single slide that sums up the differences between the three web generations, you will likely have a better grasp of what is coming than before.

found via Stephen’s Lighthouse

Libology is now available in an audio version.  This is made possible through a service called Odiogo, which works with content providers to enable a streamlined means of creating downloadable audio files of web sites.  What this means for readers is that you can download and listen to posts read by a machine that sounds like Stephen Hawking’s suave younger brother.

While the voice definitely is computer generated, the inflections are quite natural, and the content very understandable.  In addition, I hold any WordPress add-on to the golden rule:  thou shalt not break validation for XHTML, CSS or RSS.

Odiogo found via a post on Catalogablog

This has been a busy week; so much so that the previous post, HTML 5, Google Wave, and the Future of the Web was started last weekend, with some editing and additions each day, and them actually posted yesterday.  Note that it says “posted”.  I realized last night that I hadn’t actually finished it.  So, if you read it and wondered what the heck did HTML 5 have to do with the rest of the post, here is my wrap up:

You may be wondering why I started this post discussing HTML 5.  The newest version of HTML has been in development for years, and has had its share of controversy.  Many developers and users have spent years pushing for effective use of web standards, with an eye towards XHTML use and support, which emphasizes the separation of content and style.

HTML 5, according to some, muddies the content/style waters too much, and will make it harder to preserve the gains that continue to be made.

However, with the timely announcement of Google Wave, it seems clear that HTML 5 is a game changer with serious potential, and that it will make many things easily possible that currently require a great deal of work and computing power.

For the next few years, at least, we will be working with web pages that, at best, will be coded to two fairly different standards.  XHTML and HTML 5 will co-exist, and if web developers approach their task with an understanding of each, we can design sites around the standard that suits them best.

Perhaps the next iteration of HTML will be a unification of the standards, allowing everything to exist within one framework.  I don’t know if that is possible (and don’t know HTML 5 enough to have a grasp of the differences between them), but I for one will be very happy to have two powerful and well-created standards to work with, and look forward to seeing what lies in the future.

Amidst a great many other topics, HTML 5 has been on my mind the past couple of weeks.  It started on Tuesday, May 26th, with Kevin Yank posting HTML 5 : Now or Never? on the SitePoint blog.  He was floating the question of whether or not they should look into publishing a book on HTML 5 now, or if they need to wait until it matures enough for developers to use with confidence.  If you read his post, and especially if you look over the comments, you will see that there is a full range of opinions (including that HTML 5 should never be implemented) by developers about the topic.

This remained a relatively minor, background issue until two days later, Thursday, May 28th.  On that day Google announce the existence of a new project called Google Wave.  My initial thought was that Google was simply creating their version of a FaceBook/Twitter/Blogging style platform.  The more I looked, the more I realized that this was much different, and much more important, than a differently branded service.  Wave is something that has the potential to change many, many aspects of how we use the internet.

What is Google Wave?  I have spent a good part of last week trying to distill it into a couple of paragraphs, and am not having much success.  The overall essence of it is something that I haven’t yet wrapped my head around, but here are a few aspects of it that will hopefully illustrate some of it:

It is a communication platform that allows users to send, receive, and use a variety of information (think communications like e-mails, IM, tweets, feeds, etc.) in a way that offers greater control, speed, and usability.  Messaging becomes “real-time”, with your keystrokes being sent live to the person you are communcating with (unless you select to hold the message until you are ready).  The effect of this is that it becomes possible to hold a real-time conversation with others utilizing a variety of communication forms simultaneously.  You can incorporate text, images, documents, and other digital formats into the conversation in a free-flowing manner that saves time, effort and reduces confusion.

To quote from the introduction to an interview, “Email is asynchronous conversation. Instant messaging, by contrast, is synchronous. Wave is both.“  Possibly the best general description of Wave could be that it lets users and groups easily communicate and collaborate in one interface, using whatever editing/communication/collaboration techniques fit the task at hand.  Think of it as a collaboration mash-up tool.

A few places to find further info:

• Went Walkabout : Brought Back Google Wave. (Google Blog)
• Google Wave Drips with Ambition. (TechCrunch)
• Video Interview with the Google Wave Founders (TechCrunch)
• Live with the Google Wave Creators (TechCrunch)
• Sergey Brin : Google Wave Will Set a New Benchmark for Interactivity (TechCrunch)
• Google I/O A Real Eye-Opener (SitePoint)

Watch for the technological shift from these developments.  This will not only give us new and improved tools to perform tasks and work together (think of the possibilities for online meetings and conferencing), but will set standards for what will be expected from web presences.  Our OPACS may have some new goals to aim for.

Note added later:  I have had a busy week, and forgot to actually address the relationship between HTML 5 and Google Wave.  I do so in another post, Why HTML 5.  Apologies for not getting it right the first time!

Got an update from Linda Hulbert via SERIALST regarding their issues with Wiley (which I posted on Libology last week).  Wiley demonstrated that they could be flexible, and in doing so has allowed a library to continue to provide their content, and allows them to continue to be the company providing content.  This is a win-win situation, in which everyone makes adjustments in a way that ultimately benefits all involved:

I am happy to report that Wiley got back to me directly the day after the original post. The other happy news is that St. Thomas will be treated as a single site permitting us to sign the BAL license (Basic Access License) and not be required to use the EAL (Enhanced Access License).

We have looked at the language of both licenses closely to see what best serves the University of St. Thomas. We are grateful for the opportunity to choose rather than be locked into a kind of license because of a multi-site designation. I wish that everyone had the choice.

It appears to us that the BAL will meet all of our needs. We’ve read the license, the EBSCO license detail and looked at the Wiley FAQ. The only difference we can tell is that in the BAL, ILL is not explicit, but it is inferred and electronic course-packs are not explicit but they are also inferred. More than silent on the matter, the language permits the activities without so naming them.

We worried about two more areas: access in perpetuity for the content purchased (to obviate the need for purchasing paper, too) and usage data. The license, the FAQ and EBSCO’s review all indicate that we have access in perpetuity to subscribed data either by their supplying archival copy or continued access online. I would imagine, although it is not stated, that as long as we have any online Wiley content we will have access to purchased content online. While we subscribe we have access back to 1997, if available. I would not expect them to continue access to unpurchased content after cancellation.

Usage data: This is a change. At one point the EAL was required for usage data but that is no longer true. Both the FAQ and the license indicate that BAL license users will have usage data.

The benefits they list at their FAQ for all subscribers: Free access to Counter-compliant usage data; unlimited concurrent users, free course-pack and walk-in user access; content back to 1997 where available and perpetual access to content back to 1997.

We have a few things to negotiate with Wiley – our institution prefers licenses to be silent on governing law if we can’t have Minnesota and we would like to have a co-signed license. But in all the important ways, we are thrilled with the BAL.

So, these are our experiences. This is all good for UST.

I thought I would share some of the comments I got back from colleagues from various lists. Because some were directed just to me, I am going to have them all be anonymous.

Overall, what I see is that Wiley has replaced Elsevier as the least valued ‘partner’ in the scholarly communication chain. Because we have a choice, we are comfortable doing business with Wiley.

Her e-mail, with comments from her colleagues, can be found at the SERIALST Archive.