Exciting news in the browser wars:  Google is releasing has released a beta version of a web browser that it is calling Chrome.

Why does this matter?  The open-source browser will feature:

1. Every tab running in isolation from the other tabs – if something goes kablooey, you only lose that one particular tab.
2. Streamlined code designed for efficient running of online software, which translates into faster speeds and greater stability.
3. A new Javascript engine designed with future web applications in mind (and optimized versions of Google Apps, I bet).

Even if Chrome doesn’t become a contender (and you won’t catch me making that bet) these and other features will certainly set the stage for advancements in other web browsers.

Google has released a 40 page comic book (web version) (Pdf version) detailing their reasons for creating Chrome and highlighting its features.

Why should this excite libraries?  Just remember that the most exciting integrated library system out there, Evergreen, uses the XPCOM framework from the Mozilla project, and Chrome can likely be used in similar ways.

Here is a screen capture of Chrome’s logo (which reminds me a bit of the alien camera thingy in the 1953 version of War of the Worlds).

thanks to CNet News for reporting the leak…

After much anticipation, version 2.0 of the Social Opac (SOPAC) went live this morning at the Darien Library in Connecticut.

It looks very good… excellent, in fact.  I am already looking forward to playing with this version of the software.  What I really like at first glance:

• It was created with everyone in mind:  in theory can be coupled with any ILS for both the catalog and patron information.
• It is designed to allow sharing of reviews and other public content between libraries, thereby creating a larger social “pool”.
• The design is clean and looks to be well laid out.

The only problematic aspect I see initially is that it fails XHTML validation in a fairly dramatic way:  the doctype is listed as XHTML 1.0 Strict, but appears to have over 50 problems with the home page alone (over 200 for an OPAC search result page).  By just looking at the numbers, each type of page comes dramatically closer to validating as HTML 4.01 Strict (19 errors and 67 errors respectively) which seems odd to me.

Compromises in validation often have to be accepted for results pages, but I see no reason for not having a standards-compliant entry page.  I suspect that this could be a great “clean up” project once the dust has settled from the upgrade.

Overall, this is a great accomplishment, and a great piece of software.  This is certain to grab a lot of well-deserved attention, and will hopefully inspire all ILS and OPAC creators to improve their products.

thanks to Jessamyn for her post

Lorcan Demsey has a post on metadata that does a great job of illustrating two types of data collections by describing them as lakes and rivers.  The idea did not originate with him; rather he encountered it via OCLC’s Eric Hellman.

• Lakes are repositories of information that change little over time, and are fed from a few well-defined sources, supplemented by occasional “springs”.  A good analog for this is the library catalog.
• Rivers are cascading flows of information, changing rapidly and fed by many sources.  The quote that describes this most effectively is often attributed to Heraclitus : “you cannot step into the same river twice.”*

This is a fantastic way to frame the ongoing transition that libraries face.  We are transforming ourselves (being forced to transform?  some combination of the two?) from a lake-based information service to a river-based information service.  We are having to learn as we go to navigage ever-changing waterways, dodging sandbars and debris in a boat that was designed over a century ago for lake use.

Keep this analogy in mind… it lends itself well.

* Wikipedia offers the following quote listed within their page on Heraclitus: “We both step and do not step in the same rivers. We are and are not.” This quote is simultaneously much more illustrative of the complexity of our situation, and much more confusing.