Found a fantastic slideshow covering the basics of Open Source ILS software via the Proverbial Lone Wolf Librarian:
Direct link to the slides on SlideShare
Library Technology Guides has a couple of interesting data sets that, in a limited way, shows some of the dynamic patterns in the Integrated Library System (ILS) market:
Integrated Library System turnover in 2009 (listed by the ILS migrated to)
Reverse Integrated Library system turnover in 2009 (listed by the ILS migrated from)
It is interesting to note that a great deal of activity involves libraries moving to open source systems, mainly Koha (143) or Evergreen (92). The top proprietary system is SirsiDynix’s Symphony (84), but over 70 of those installations are from other SirsiDynix products. After that, the numbers drop to the 40-something range.
Note that these only reflect libraries that have their relevant information listed in Lib-Web-Cats. If your library isn’t listed, you should submit your information; if listed, you should double-check your information and update if necessary.
found via GuidePosts
A link to a thought-provoking article on Open Source business models was posted by Stephen Abram on his blog, Stephen’s Lighthouse. If you follow that last link, you may note that not only does he post the link “without comment”, he has also turned off the option for his readers to comment on the article.
I suspect (but truly don’t know) that this is because of the firestorm of attention he received surrounding a position paper he wrote, and that his company was circulating to some of their customers. If comments were enabled on his post, the following thought (probably compressed) would have been left by me. Now it is a post all its own:
What libraries need now, more now then ever, is a good, open discussion of software and service models. Many of our problems derive from weaknesses in those models, and many of our future problems will derive from weaknesses in the models we choose to move forward with.
The New York Times article is a good example of reporting that misses the elephant in the room: the Open Source model is not the same as the Closed Source model. The closed source model uses sales and company profit to determine success. An open source project could succeed in that way, but looking simply at this ignores the model.
If a group of people put the effort into creating, maintaining, distributing, and using an open source software product, it will survive. If the project is dynamic, and responds to the needs of the users, it will thrive. If it does all of the above better than the closed source companies that make competing products, then it is not fair to judge them based only on sales and profit.
One other thing to add to the mix: don’t ignore the wealth created and saved by those who use the product. If this were calculated and compared, there might be a few surprises in store for companies, including some companies that have libraries for their customers.
Most of us who have used and installed any of the many variants of Linux started off with a live CD. These allow you to boot your computer up using the CD, and try out the operating system without having to install or configure it. The CD can have whatever software the creator decides to install, pending available space.
I first used the Knoppix live CD, later Ubuntu, and now many other variants (including my current favorite, LinuxMint).
Mizstik has put together a live CD with Ubuntu server and an installation of the Koha ILS, calling it Koha LiveCD.
I think this is a fantastic idea, and it holds the potential for introducing many people to Koha, and giving them a better understanding of what the software can and cannot do for them. This understanding will only help the adoption of open source library software.
My next wish at this point would be for a live CD of Evergreen.
found via What I Learned Today
Jenny Levine makes a great case on The Shifted Librarian for adding a feature to your sites that allows users to easily share your content via social networks. Not only will this offer a way for your users to help spread the work about services and activities that you offer, but it can help them keep track of information they find so that they can revisit it later. This will be a benefit for users of mobile browsers, which are rapidly becoming a more significant portion of visitors to our web sites.
You may notice that I have followed her advice and have added the Add to Any service to this blog, visible at the bottom of every post (and checked to ensure it validates against XHTML and CSS standards, of course; a requirement I have for any add-on).
I have been aware of the Center for History and New Media for quite some time (even posted a link here), but only recently did I take a look at their site beyond the work they do with Zotero. I was surprised, in a very good way, at all of the resources they have available:
These are just a portion of the resources under their Research + Tools tab. When you consider their offerings under the Teaching + Learning and Collecting + Exhibiting tabs as well, you can see that it would take hours to properly sample the useful items in this site. Take some time to see what they can offer to help your projects.
The Perfect Storm is a brief essay in the current issue of the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) newsletter. G. Sayeed Choudhury, the author of the essay, states that
“Universities have authentication and authorization systems to identify who you are and what you can use; they also have office software or course management systems to support collaboration. How many passwords do you use within your university system? How easy is it to collaborate with people outside your university? Yet within and without our universities, many faculty, students, and staff collaborate daily using Google’s suite of tools. This trend will almost certainly grow once Google Wave is launched later this year. With its impressive integration of services and novel method for identity management, Google Wave may become a tsunami that washes away the office software suite—and perhaps even the course management system.”
I am not so sure that Google Wave will be the tipping point, but it is certainly another step in this direction. How many of us have stepped outside of the boundaries of the traditional tools we use for our work and schooling? It is humbling to recognize how much time and effort can be saved through the proper application of a new software program, or an online service, or even tapping into social networking to gain insight (it is interesting that e-mail lists are considered standard, while Facebook, Twitter and blogging still have the “Library 2.0″ label stuck on them… they are all different forms of social networking, with their accompanying strengths and weaknesses).
Choudhury adds:
Too often we fail to examine trends beyond our own institutional context; we are reluctant to embrace risk taking when developing services or infrastructure. The choices that universities and libraries make regarding infrastructure in the next few years will have profound implications for the future.
I would take it a step further, and suggest that we not only don’t look beyond our own context, we fail to grasp the possibilities that exist with new technology and new applications of existing technology. When the environment surrounding our libraries changes, the environment within our libraries changes as well – whether we incorporate these changes or remain passive.
In other words: We ignore tools such as Google Wave, Open Source, Open Access, Wikis, Blogs, Social Networking, social library catalog tools, and everything else at our own peril. These tools have changed our libraries, are currently changing our libraries, and will continue to change our libraries as far into the future as we can see. If we want to remain relevant (in other words: if we want to survive), we need to pay attention. Libraries as they have existed in the past will continue to play a role, but that role will be viewed more as an archive than a dynamic library.
We have lost a lot of ground, but we have the ability and the resources to do this, and it starts with each and every one of us. How can we do our job better? Smarter? Faster? What tools can we use? How can others help? The libraries that pay attention to those questions, and strive to answer them effectively, will be the ones to thrive.
I challenge you to, within the next week, find one new tool, idea, or resource that makes you better at your job. Repeat, ad infinitum – from here it appears that it is Turtles all the way down.
PACER is the online access portal for “U.S. Appellate, District, and Bankruptcy court records and documents nationwide”. Because the documents it provides are created by the federal judiciary, they are not copyrightable; because PACER is the only place to obtain these records, it is a critical link to those who need case information. PACER also charges a per-page fee ($0.08 per page up to 30 pages in a specific document) for access.
RECAP (which is PACER spelled backwards) is a new, open source Firefox extension which appears to follow all the rules: you access documents through PACER, paying all assessed fees, and you get your docuements. RECAP, however adds two elements to the mix:
On the surface, it may appear that people are conducting an end-run against the court’s system for providing documents. However, a broader view strongly suggests that these documents are public, and that the PACER system is actually an exception in the realm of access to public records.
The Executive and Legislative branches of the federal government provide documents free to the user; this is an attempt to make the workings and decisions of the judiciary as public as the other branches. RECAP is a fully legal means to provide information in a way that is the spirit of the law.
Further reading:
One of the more frustrating things about open source software is the fact that many projects have little-to-no documentation. William Shields, a software developer from Australia, posts about his experiences and concludes that he isn’t going to patronize projects that don’t pay attention to their documentation.
He is correct. Any mature software project, whether open-source or proprietary, should have resources available to provide information, specifications, options, and assistance to users. This doesn’t mean that every piece of software needs a manual and a call desk; there should be options available to provide assistance.
For a smaller, lesser-used product, a brief overview and contact information for further questions may suffice. As the user base grows, group maintained resources (wiki, lists, forums) can allow those with more experience aid novices.
The ultimate goal with any software is for people to use it, and use it effectively to improve their lives. Good information on using the software is part of that picture. When you find an open source project that needs documentation, consider how you might be able to add your knowledge and experience to the project (i.e. when life hands you lemons, make lemonade).
found via What I Learned Today…
May All Your Standards Be Simple and Evolvable is a post by John Wilbanks on Science Blog’s Common Knowledge. It is written with medical data standards in mind, but it could be discussing the state of library data as well:
“…TCP/IP, created simply to move bits between computers, begat a variety of new protocols like FTP, Gopher, Finger, many other protocols that layered atop the basic bits standard. Complexity from simplicity. Attempting to embed file transfer into the bits protocol would have made this whole process a lot harder.”
We are approaching a point in which we will be moving our data out of the cumbersome and outdated MARC format. It will happen, regardless of the heel-dragging that has been taking place for over 10 years. The debate is still heated over what we will replace the standard with.
Can we come up with something simple and evolvable? I define this as being able to build things out of data without having to break the it up into usable chunks. Have you looked at a MARC (.mrc) record with a text editor? There is no easy way to determine what much of the data means, and the entire record is one string of information. You can usually pick out the title, author and a few other things, but mostly it looks like gobbledygook.
If our data were in nice, small, understandable pieces to begin with, with straightforward rules guiding how it was formatted, it would invite innovation and creative use. We are only hindering ourselves with the complexity and arcane rules; simplicity would serve everyone’s needs far better.
Brett Bonfield has a great post, actually more of a long essay or article, on open source library software projects. W-E-B-S-I-T-E, Find Out What It Means To Me (great title, but certainly more limited than the post’s topic) covers a wide range of software, the reasons people use (or don’t use) them, and the status of several of the larger projects that currently exist.
There is a lot of information in the post, and links for further exploration. This just made my recommended reading list.
Sugar is the desktop environment developed for the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) program, and it is now available as an open-source download through the Sugar Labs project. This could be a fantastic way to keep older computers useful and current.
Here’s a link to their Downloads page. Documentation and Community Support can be found on their Wiki.
found viae Stephen’s Lighthouse
Mozilla’s Open Web Tools Directory is a site designed to quickly connect the user with a variety of online tools for a variety of projects. The categories include Design tools, Coding tools, Debuggers, and more. Many of the projects listed are new to me, so I expect to find at least one or two new tools for my own projects.
found via TechCrunch
A couple of news items that signal trends in the way the web will evolve:
Internet Explorer has lost a significant amount of market share recently. This is good news in a couple of ways. First, it signals growing diversity among web browsers, and the people who use them. This strengthens the concept of web standards, and encourages design that is browser agnostic. The other way in which this is good news is that IE6 use has dropped below 10% and IE7 is heading that way as well. Internet Explorer 8 is superior to either one, and it is great to see people upgrading. There are also many fantastic browsers not made by Microsoft, including Mozilla’s Firefox, Apple’s Safari, Google’s Chrome, and Opera. Whichever you choose (and why limit yourself to just one?), make sure you are using the most current version. Otherwise the only thing you aren’t missing out on is the security problems.
XHTML 2 will disappear at the end of this year. That I think this is good might surprise those who know that I have been designing using versions of the XHTML standard since around 2005. I like the separation of content from design, and some of the features of XHTML 2 look fantastic. However, I think HTML 5 is going to take the internet by storm, and it is better to incorporate as many of the good features of XHTML 2 in HTML 5, eliminate the problematic issues, and let one standard guide the design of general web pages. This requires that HTML 5 be as good as it looks. I have high hopes for it.
If you have a few minutes, answer a few questions for Nicole Engard, the Open Source Evangelist for Liblime (how’s that for a job title?). She is conducting an online survey because, in her words:
“I am working on some very very broad research on open source use in libraries for a book I’m working on. The focus of the book will be on software you can use that is open source. If you have a chance to answer this brief survey to help me out that would be greatly appreciated… Thanks a bunch!!! (and feel free to share with others).”
found on Web4Lib
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:
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!
This post will contain just a couple of links, but there is a wealth of information on the other end of each:
Oracle has purchased Sun Microsystems.
This is significant on many levels. Many of our library systems run on software or hardware from these companies. The Voyager library I used to work for used an Oracle database running on a Sun Solaris server. The clients (Circulation, Cataloging, Acquisitions, etc.) for III’s Millennium system run on Java.
Many web-based software platforms use MySQL (an open-source database project owned by Sun), including many, many blogs (including this one) wikis and CMS.
Many of us use OpenOffice as either their primary or as an additional office suite.
I am not saying that we are at risk for losing these foundations of our library and internet software programs. The fact that OpenSolaris, Java, MySQL, and OpenOffice are all open source means that we can trust that they will be with us in some form for as long as there is a demand (a trust that cannot be equally placed with any closed source software, which can disappear with the collapse or acquisition of the company holding the software rights).
What I am sure of is that we will see changes. Oracle has a strategy, or if it doesn’t, it will. Some of these programs will likely see greater support and resources (hopefully OpenOffice), others will likely see less (hopefully none of them). Some may become more focused towards a particular segment of the technology world (watch MySQL for this possibility).
Look at what you use, and recognize that today marks a turning point for some of the software. Hopefully it is for the better.
found via TechCrunch and MetaFilter
For those interested in Open Source Integrated Library Systems such as Koha, Evergreen, Open Library Environment Project (OLE), OpenBiblio, etc., the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services (ALCTS) will be holding an e-forum on April 21st and 22nd. From the announcement:
Please join us for a free ALCTS e-forum discussion! Participation is open to all.
April 21-22, 2009: Open Source ILS and Technical Services: High Risk or High Reward?
Moderated by Clint Chamberlain, University of Texas Libraries, and Rob Van Rennes, University of Iowa Libraries, members of the ALCTS CRS Acquisitions Committee.
Over the past few years, many librarians have expressed dissatisfaction with our current ILS, citing inflexible systems, high costs, and lackluster vendor service. Some libraries have consequently pursued Open Source ILS such as OLE, Koha, and Evergreen. Join this e-forum to share your experiences with and your questions about Open Source ILS and your thoughts on the future of the traditional, proprietary ILS. We are particularly interested in hearing about experiences with the technical services aspects of Open Source ILS: acquisitions, management of continuing resources, and cataloging.
Discussion will start Tuesday, April 21, 9AM EST and will conclude Wednesday, April 22, 5PM EST.
You can sign up at http://lists.ala.org/sympa/, go to the ALCTS section, then select alcts-eforum@ala.org.
I am especially interested in hearing about how the Cataloging, Acquisitions, and Circulation functions are viewed by people who use them in a production environment. Koha and Evergreen have been making incredible progress into the library world, and I suspect that many of us will have experience with them before long.
received via SerialsT list
Marc was a Good & Loyal Mule but Now It’s Time to Shoot It is a post over on the Future4catalogers blog that does an effective job at explaining why the library community should be focusing on using a new, more powerful (and easier to learn, use, explain, and mashup) metadata structure.
I suspect that part of the problem lies with people who don’t really know what a marc record looks like, and why it is nearly impossible to work with in its native form. From the essay:
To do anything with a Marc record, it must be disassembled and reconstituted in pieces. Even the displays we see as Marc workforms require this disassembly and reassembly to make it comprehensible to catalogers.
Most see the nicely formatted row-by-row marc view that can be seen on some library OPACs as well as cataloging software in our ILS platforms. If you have ever opened a pure marc file in a text editor, you would quickly conclude that locating and understanding information in the record is very challenging, and the thought of editing the record in this form is crazy talk.
If a good and robust metadata format were used instead, then the data could be arranged and edited in a wide variety of ways (including replication of the standard cataloging interface). Even better, however, is that one can open, view, and edit the record (or even a large group of records) within a text editor (though there are and will be many tools to streamline and simplify the process).
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.libology.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
Powered by FireStats
