Libology Blog

2008 was an uncertain year for Libraryland.  Ideas and tools abound for how we can do more with what we have, and we are becoming more aware of what it is we have : data and the systems to organize it.

There are some serious storm clouds on the horizon:

• The economy is in a condition which hasn’t been seen since the 1930s, and most sectors are wondering if and when we will see the bottom.  This will affect libraries in two ways : Public libraries will see rising use in ways they have only dreamed of, and all libraries will see their funding and other resources fade.  This includes lower tax revenue for publicly funded libraries, lower dollars for state-supported organizations, and fewer funds for academic libraries as enrollment drops and higher education struggles to make ends meet.  These effects will be delayed somewhat, so there is time to prepare.
• Organizations and companies have finally discovered the value of data and other stored information.  The movement towards openness is being countered by a tightening of control.  Google Books, OCLC, and a variety of publishers are attempting to control access and use of what they have stored in their systems, sometimes even from the creators of the data/information.
• Costs for software, services and access are still driving upward at a rate that is unsustainable in the current economy.  Book publishers are already cutting back on the number of new authors they take a risk in publishing; journal subscriptions are still all over the place, with some titles having exorbitant rates, and others being published Open Access; software and service contracts are expensive, with the added stress and cost of switching to other systems keeping many from exploring other options.

What can libraries do?  Re-read the opening paragraph:  Ideas and tools abound for how we can do more with what we have.  Each library should look at their environment and evaluate what they can do differently.  Every service you offer should be examined for changes that will cost less and perhaps even offer more.  A few examples:

• On a larger scale:  what do you pay, in real dollars for your Integrated Library System (ILS), assuming you have one?  What would it cost you in staff time and money to switch to an open source alternative?  Companies are out there that offer support packages; I suspect that many libraries could offer much more with fewer resources in this area.  If you don’t currently have one, this may be a great time to begin that project.
• Do you offer laptop computers for checkout?  For staff use?  How much did each of them cost?  How much would be saved by selecting netbooks during their replacement schedule?  Perhaps you could even get two netbooks for less than the cost of each notebook.  This won’t work if higher-level software is needed (such as Photoshop), but most of a notebook’s use is in the realm of office software and internet use, which are the netbook’s bread and butter.
• Hire and retain people with tech savvy and curiousity, and give them the time and resources to experiment with new services and technology.  Do you really need to spend thousands of dollars to display book covers on your OPAC?  Is the cost of an OPAC upgrade preventing you from implementing one?  Can you add social networking features (reviews, recommendations, etc.) without wondering where the money will come from?  The answers may surprise you.  $100 and 100 hours of staff time can give you options for all of the above in a small-to-mid-sized library, if you have the environment to let it happen.

It is generally understood that new business opportunities are created in economic downturns, and that it is a great environment for a small company with an understanding of what the public wants.  The same goes for libraries and library organizations.  When everyone else is looking to protect what they already have (while spending lots of money in the process), those who develop new, inexpensive ideas are poised to suceed.  In libraryspeak : serve your patrons better for less money, and become the library you have dreamed of.  Your best opportunity may in fact exist now.

one of the links found via Open Access News

About 2 million images from the LIFE Photo Archive have been digitized and are available via Google Image Search.  What is even better is that, over the next few months, the remaining 8 million images from the collection will be added.  Many of these have never been published, so there ought to be some historically interesting and significant gems in this collection.

You can search the collection by using the above link, or add “source:life” (without the quotes) to your image search query.

via the Official Google Blog

Google has reached a settlement with the group of publishers who filed suit in 2005 over the book digitization project.  It is a legal document with many elements, and I cannot hope to make an overall evaluation of the agreement with just the amount that I have browsed (much less with my limited ability to discern the true meaning of legalese).  However, there are a couple of sections that raise questions:

7.2 Fully Participating Library Uses… (b) Use of Library Digital Copies… (vii) Personal Scholarly Use and Classroom Use. The Fully Participating Library, if part of a Higher Education Institution, may allow faculty members and research staff of that Higher Education Institution to read, print, download or otherwise use up to five (5) pages of any Book from its LDC [Library Digital Copy] that is not Commercially Available for the following purposes: (1) personal scholarly use (for each Book, no more than once per person per term) and (2) classroom use in such Higher Education Institution that is limited to the instructors and students in the class and for the term in which the class is offered; provided that (a) the Fully Participating Library does not know at the time of such use that it is in material non-compliance with Section 8.2 (Security Standard, Security Implementation Plan and Security Audits) with respect to uses of the LDC authorized pursuant to this Section 7.2(b)(vii) (Personal Scholarly Use and Classroom Use), and (b) the Fully Participating Library keeps track of and reports all such uses of Books to the Registry in the course of the audit conducted pursuant to Section 8.2(c) (Audits) or, otherwise, upon reasonable request of the Registry, provided that such requests may be made no more than semi-annually. The Registry may make information from such reports regarding the usage of an individual Book available to the Rightsholder of such Book upon request of the Rightsholder. A Fully Participating Library may not read, print, download or otherwise use a Book or Insert through its LDC pursuant to this Section 7.2(b)(vii) (Personal Scholarly Use and Classroom Use) if such use is available through the Institutional Subscription and the Institutional Subscription service is offered or is available to the Fully Participating Library (whether for a fee or as a beta product) at the time such Fully Participating Library seeks to make such use.” (page 76)

The agreement defines Commercially Available as “…that the Rightsholder of such Book, or such Rightsholder’s designated agent, is, at the time in question, offering the Book (other than as derived from a Library Scan) for sale new through one or more then-customary channels of trade in the United States.” (Section 1.28 on page 4)  Does this mean that if a researcher or faculty is able to read (or print) only up to 5 pages of the scanned book each semester for personal scholarly use - and then only if the book is not able to be purchased through “customary channels of trade”?

Am I interpreting this correctly?  Is this not a severe restriction of the “Fair Use” clause of copyright?  Why would a researcher want to agree to such limitations when the physical item allows for a broader use?  I may be misreading this section, however, and hope to have it clarified in the near future.

Another section that gives me pause:

Section 3.8 (b) Effect of Changes in Law. Google will be able to take advantage of any future legislative change(s), such as legislation allowing the use of orphan works (if enacted), that put Google at a competitive disadvantage in its use of Books in any Google Products and Services that are subject to this Settlement Agreement; provided, however, that Google may choose to receive the benefit of such change(s) only if a third party is actually taking advantage of such law(s) in connection with services that competitively disadvantage Google in its provision of any such Google Products and Services; provided, further, that no changes in the “fair use” doctrine as codified in Section 107 of the Copyright Act shall trigger this Section 3.8(b) (Effect of Changes in Law).” (page 37)

So if a legislative body, such as the United States Congress, passes a law that allows for broader use of this type of material (i.e. a change in copyright law), Google can only put the broader use into Google Books if it can demonstrate that another company is already taking business away from them by implementing it; otherwise, Google must keep the higher restrictions in place.

In addition, what happens if “fair use” is broadened?  It won’t trigger this section.  Does that mean that Google can follow fair use, or that Google cannot?  The fair use provision seems to be placed on an equal footing as the “competitively disadvantage” clause.  Does Google pass along the broader use understanding, or does it just pass?

For better or worse, this settlement is going to dramatically change how libraries use electronic books.  Hopefully the overall agreeement implements a positive experience for all parties involved, and that my concerns (and the concerns of others) are either misread clauses or taking a section out of context.

The element of this agreement that holds great promise is the potential for institutional access to the entire collection of scanned books.  Imagine having millions of books available to our patrons via a usable and cost-effective agreement.  We are moving towards the future; are we ready for it (and the future for us)?

Further information and links:

• Contents of the Google Book Search Copyright Settlement
• Librarian.net
• Official Google Blog
• Panlibus Blog
• Open Access News

On a lighthearted, and non-library, note:  here is a screenshot of what the Google Chrome browser shows when a web page goes kaploee:

Google Books can now be embedded into a web page in a similar way that a YouTube video is able to be embedded.

Besides the “nifty cool” aspect of this, I can see one element of this that should make anyone involved with library web pages interested:   what a wonderous add-on to an OPAC!  No longer would we be limited to a link to the book in Google, but our users can potentially browse through a book during their search!  Examples here and here.

According to the Embedded Viewer API Developers Guide, identifiers for the books can be ISBN, OCLC, LCCN, and Book Search Volume numbers, or the Google Book Search URL for one-off uses.

Here is an example for a particular item being presented in WordPress. Do a search for “Wilbur Wright” to see why I chose it:

via LISNews and Technology Bites for WP solution

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 more than a year, there has been a bit of activity at the Google Librarian Central site, though not what was hoped for when I heard that they were preparing an update.

What they announced in a post titled “Endless Summer” was that they were closing down the Librarian Central Blog and communicating via their newsletter. Comments and suggestions will be handled by a web form submission.

Ouch! Double-Ouch!! This is better than the dead silence of the past year, but just barely. We have been moved back in time, relegated to Web 1.0.

They could have kept the blog alive by posting the individual newsletter items one-by-one. They could have used the blog for items posted or discussed elsewhere, but posted there because of their interest to libraries. They could have opened things up a bit and asked for volunteers to coordinate topics and ideas for better incorporating Google into libraries. Any of these would have been about the same amount of work, and would have preserved or improved the dynamic and social aspects of the site. They backed away instead.

We are left to wonder why.

I noticed when reviewing my server statistics that one of my entries was run through Google Translate.  Curiosity being what it is, I called up the page:

When I realized that the post was about (see it here in English), I wondered if the humor would translate properly and if the reader would understand the nature of the post.  Low key tongue-in-cheek humor doesn’t tend to translate well.

I don’t think I will change my approach, but it was interesting enough to share.

Microsoft announced today that they are shutting down their book digitization project.

They also announced that the Live Search Books site will be shut down sometimes next week.

This is a disappointment in that I was hoping that the competition factor would push both Microsoft and Google to extend their respective projects further and further, thereby making that which we could access better and better.  Hopefully both Google and the Internet Archive keep up the good work, and that we reach the point where books are as easy to locate and access online as are many other forms of information (such as news, journals, etc.).

from TechCrunch

OCLC and Google are exchanging parts of their data in a way that will likely change the way we view full-text scanned books:

• Google is providing linking information to OCLC in order to make Google Book Search items discoverable through WorldCat.
• OCLC is providing their cataloging records via libraries who are members of the Google Book Project in order to enhance Google Book Search, primarily by linking directly to WorldCat records.

I doubt that it will be long before this will be able to be used to enhance library OPACS.

found via ResourceShelf

(and the post title refers to this commercial)

Unicode has recently become the top website character encoding in the world, according to Google.  The point is driven home in this chart.

Even if you do not use foreign languages or encoding on your web sites, Unicode should be the default encoding for anything you create for the web.  It puts everyone on the same (web) page, so to speak.

Google has packaged many of its tools into an offering for non-profit organizations.  If your group has a 501(c)(3) tax status, and is not political or religious in nature, then you most likely qualify.

This is fairly neat.  I worked with a library conference for several years, and much of what I set up for the collaborative and supportive workings for this group are included in the Google offering:  an online workspace, communication tools (e-mail and group discussion), online checkout, and analytics to offer feedback on the website are all analogous to tools I set up for the group one at a time.

In addition, they offers Google Docs, Calendar, and Google Grants (which is basically free advertising on Google search results pages).   For an organization like a Friends of the Library or a library-focused conference, these are tools that can take the work of a few people and turn out very professional, well-organized results.

If your group has a basic footprint on the web, but can see the benefits from increased collaboration and outreach, this is a fantastic offer that should be seriously reviewed and considered.

found via Official Google Blog

This is a few days old, but it is still an important bit of news : Google has opened it’s Application Programming Interface (API) to developers. What this means for libraries is that they now have the potential to link their catalogs, via ISBN, OCLC, or LCCN numbers, to items available through the Google Book Search.

As with many of Google’s offerings, there are caveats : there doesn’t seem to be a way to generate any information to indicate full-text availability (the information from Google loads after your OPAC entry), which makes it harder to know just how much it adds to your collection.

As time goes by, however, this could become a powerful tool to leverage our library presence… this is another step in making as much information available to the user as possible, and making it easy to find as well. Libraries should look into making this work for them… everyone stands to benefit.

from Open Access News, LISNews, Official Google Blog

I have liked, and used, the phrase “May you live in interesting times” for many years. I had always thought it to be a Chinese saying. It appears that it is unlikely to be Chinese in origin, and part of the argument comes from the Google Book project.

The story is on the blog TeleRead.

found via LISNews

I have liked, and used, the phrase “May you live in interesting times” for many years. I had always thought it to be a Chinese saying. It appears that it is unlikely to be Chinese in origin, and part of the argument comes from the Google Book project.

The story is on the blog TeleRead.

found via LISNews

None of this is new, but I encountered a reminder of how quickly online software is becoming more and more useful:

Zoho Writer (part of the Zoho collection of online tools) has been updated, and now supports saving in the new .docx format (nothing about opening, however), as well as a thesaurus, and improved support for end/footnotes.

Don’t forget about Google Docs, which also has an impressive collection of tools available.

Also, there is Zamzar, which converts many, many file formats into many, many others.

These tools, taken as a combined whole, could very well mean that we are close to only needing a broadband connection in order to have an office suite at our fingertips.

reminded by TechCrunch

Google Apps Team Edition is a new permutation of Google Apps (something I have been using a fair amount during the past couple of months) designed for collaborative projects.

You need to register using a work or school e-mail address (I am not sure how broadly they define groups for this - could a non-profit, volunteer organization use this service?) and then you get to use Google Docs, Calendar, Talk and Start Page as a group, customized to your needs.

from Official Google Blog

Added later:  ars technica has an interesting take on how this service is enabling end users to bypass their IT departments

I am a bit of a political junkie… and it generally won’t spill over onto this blog. However, one resource that I have found very interesting when examining Ohio and New Hampshire results has been Google Maps coverage of the primaries. They haven’t committed to doing all 50 states, but the service has been popular, and I suspect that they will continue at least as long as the nominations are in play. As for November… who knows??

• Google LatLong Blog entry
• Iowa page
• New Hampshire page

found via Search Engine Land

Wikia, the search engine designed around the concept of wikis, has been launched in alpha.  This means that a) it isn’t going to work as well as anyone wants, and b) no fair comparing it to Google et. al., except in the theoretical.  In fact, we usually wouldn’t see software until the beta stage of development; this shows how much Wikia will rely on users.

There isn’t all that much to see yet, but the idea of an annotated search engine where the users provide feedback about the search results, which will then be used to improve future results, is tantalizing.  Search 2.0 anyone?

via Open Access News

I have encountered a few interesting items relating to online, full-text books during the past few days, and thought they would make a good snapshot of where things stand at this time:

• Google Book Search : the Good, the Bad & the Ugly is an article in the current issue of Campus Technology which gives a great, non-technical overview of what the project is doing, and where it might be going. (found via LISNews )
• Google Book Search: Document Understanding on a Massive Scale (Pdf) is the text of Luc Vincent’s keynote at the ICDAR 2007 conference. Don’t read it simply because he heads Googles Optical Character Recognition (OCR) team - read it because it is fascinating and informative! (posted to NGC4lib by Owen Stephens)
• Finally, there is The Top Inventions of 2008 by Michael Hart (inventor of the e-book and founder of Project Gutenberg). This isn’t your standard, run-of-the-mill predictions article. This looks at technology that is just around the corner (USB 3.0, Flash memory capacity, and the number of OCR scanned books) and realizes that we will soon be able to carry around more full-text books on a USB flash drive than exist in most libraries. Think about how that possibility will change our profession. (found via Open Access News )