Google is celebrating the 57th anniversary of the first barcode patent by (surprise!) replacing their logo:

Having played around with barcodes over the years, I got curious.  I printed out the page, plugged in my declawed CueCat, and scanned the barcode.  The result was both expected and surprising:  “gOOGLE”.

I haven’t been able to determine which barcode format is being used, and I have tested about 25 different formats.  Some sources are indicating that the format is Code 128, but I haven’t been able to replicate that even though I have tried several different barcode generators.

Why lead with the lowercase “g”?  Why have “OOGLE” in uppercase?  Why celebrate the 57th anniversary?  I am curious, but have not found any clues, nor has Google posted anything on either their official blog or the logos page.

I think barcode standards are under-appreciated in the library world.  They have done more to aid our handling of materials than anything short of computers, with which they are intertwined.  They serve as perhaps the best example of a standard that benefits all users, and I suspect they will be around in some form or another for quite a while.

Update:

Following some information found on TechCrunch led me to the Google zxing project.  Running the barcode09.gif file through their barcode recognition software generates “Google” with the format of CODE_128.  Within the Google sofware family, at least, the barcode works as I would expect.

As the Google Books settlement works its way to becoming reality, it is becoming apparent that Google Books will be transformed into something very much resembling a library.

Think of how this might change our roles in society.

found via LISNews

For those who have been following  H1N1 influenza virus news (and those who might expect to get questions about it), the Public Library of Science (PLOS) and Google have launched a new mashup service:

PLOS Currents : Influenza is built utilizing Google Knol and a new service from the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) called Rapid Research Notes.  This service allows the user an easy way to follow current research and search for relevant scientific information.

As we approach influenza season, expect greater levels of concern and interest in H1N1.

found via the Official Google Blog

A very straightforward and readable overview of the issues surrounding Google’s book scanning project appeared in yesterdays Financial Times :  Books : A plan to scan.

A prime focus of the analysis is the Orphan Works issue, books that fall under copyright guidelines but have no clear indication of who the actual copyright holder is.  A chart detailing the number of orphan works in existence is an excellent example of  providing just the right amount of information in a very readable way (note the use of Google’s colors):

Financial Times Graphic on Orphan Works

There is also an interesting accompanying article on the European reaction to the issue.

thanks to Jim Campbell for posting about this on Web4Lib!

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.

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!

OnlineColleges.net has a post listing their Top 10 Commencement Speeches for Tech Lovers, containing descriptions and links to speeches given by, among others,  Bill Gates (Microsoft), Steve Jobs (Apple), Larry Page (Google), Eric Schmidt (Google), Melissa Mayer (Google), and Ray and Tom Magliozzi (Car Talk on NPR).

thanks to Kelly Sonora for the e-mail tip!

– additional comment:  Kelly Sonora is fictional; the person most directly responsible for the content of the above linked post is Jessica Merritt.  This isn’t a problem, the blog is valid and the information is worthy of our time; just wanted make the credit more accurate….

Google has made the jump into supporting Microformats as well as RDFa, calling their implementation “Rich Snippets”!

This is great news on several different levels. Semantic markup within web pages provides a way to target searches much more effectively.  TechCrunch provides an excellent example:

“If I was to write a post that mentioned “The President” without naming him, Google probably wouldn’t realize that I was talking about President Obama – it might think I was referring to another US president, or perhaps the leader of a company. But using RDFa I could tag the words “The President” with “Barack Obama”. That tag would be visible to machines spidering the page for indexing (resulting in smarter search results), but wouldn’t be shown to users reading the post. In effect, it’s a way to tell search engines about your content without exposing your visitors to extraneous text.”

In addition, sites that provide well-structured metadata have the potential to be much more usable (and useful).  Library web sites, especially OPACs and Resource pages, should include structured information that details the context of the displayed content.  Using microformats in our web sites will benefit everyone involved over time.  As David Peterson notes on the SitePoint blog:

“Now that Google is supporting structured data it is high time to learn how to use this stuff.”

Was the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine incident an isolated case, or is it the first of several Elsevier journals that only appear to be legit?

Michael Hansen, CEO Of Elsevier’s Health Sciences Division, issued a statement today that suggests that a division of the company may have created the bogus journal without the knowledge of the top levels of the company:

It has recently come to my attention that from 2000 to 2005, our Australia office published a series of sponsored article compilation publications, on behalf of pharmaceutical clients, that were made to look like journals and lacked the proper disclosures. This was an unacceptable practice, and we regret that it took place.

We are currently conducting an internal review but believe this was an isolated practice from a past period in time. It does not reflect the way we operate today. The individuals involved in the project have long since left the company. I have affirmed our business practices as they relate to what defines a journal and the proper use of disclosure language with our employees to ensure this does not happen again.

Note that this statement uses the phrase “published a series of sponsored article compilation publications”.  Some sleuthing by Jonathan Rochkind and Bill Hooker indicates that Excerpta Medica, a subsidiary of Elsevier, might have published quite a few of these sponsored-yet-unacknowledged journals.

My own poking around Excerpta Medica’s website with Google has produced an interesting Pdf titled Best practices for managing publications through a drug’s lifecycle and balancing scientific rigour and credibility with commercial goals.  The document is a summary of a presentation given at by Hester Kuipers, who at the time was Program Director, Medical Communications for Exerpta Medica.  Here is a brief quote:

Scientific publications in peer-reviewed medical journals are a valuable and credible vehicle to support a medical marketing strategy. Though part of most marketing plans, publications are not a promotional activity, but rather a medical one. The relationship between scientific publications and marketing messages can best be described as the first supporting the second rather than the second driving the first.

The presentation makes it clear that the research must have primacy over the promotion; hopefully the “series of sponsored article compilation publications” turns out to be the exception and not the rule for Exerpta Medica.  Elsevier should investigate this thoroughly and publicly acknowledge the extent of the deception; the credibility of each and every one of their peer-reviewed journals is at stake.

some links found via ResourceShelf and through postings on the Cooperative Information Resources Managemnt (CIRM) list

Peter Murray has an incredibly good selection of links about the Google Book Search Settlement on the Disruptive Library Technology Jester blog.  Really.  Spend some time perusing them.

Now that Google Ventures has been officially announced, I can go public with my own news:

Libology is one of the first group of startup companies which will be receiving Google Ventures funding.  I have been in talks with someone from their Cambridge office over the past few weeks, just sent in the signed contract yesterday, and today the terms of the contract take effect.

The biggest change you will notice is that they requested some design changes to this blog, mainly to make it easier to integrate with other Google services.  (See below for screenshots)  If you are viewing this through a feed reader, check out the main page of this blog, or view this post.

Another change you may notice is that I will stop being critical in any way, shape or form when referring to Google or any of their partners, including OCLC.

And, of course, one must always remember what today is!

Google Style Main Page

Post Googlized

This is just one of my passing thoughts, which I suspect is understood by many, but not necessarily expressed this way:

Google’s PageRank is, for all practical purposes, a form of social networking applied to the concept of a particular html tag.  The ranking system is built upon the idea that someone, somewhere, decided that something on their web page was so associated with another web page that it needed to be wrapped in <a> </a> tags with the web page’s address referenced.  Thousands (millions!) of people finding it imperative to add these tags around their text, and thereby making it possible to judge the importance of specific web sites by aggregating these millions (billions!) of tags.  Will we look back at this and call it the beginning of social networking on the web?

the thought passed through my head while reading Stefano’s Linotype…

Jessamyn posted this link, in an effort to help identify the library.  I wasn’t the first to come up with the correct answer, but it was a treat to scan several pages of Google Images containing library frescos before finding this result.

Amazon.com has given in to the Publisher’s Guild on the issue of text-to-speech capabilities in the Kindle 2.

In their press release, Amazon states up front that “Kindle 2’s experimental text-to-speech feature is legal: no copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given.“  In this statement, they are correct.  If I read a book to someone who is visually or otherwise impaired, it takes a stretch of the imagination to suggest that I am actually staging a performance.

In addition, as I stated when the issue was first raised:

“How would someone with a visual impairment be able to order the audio book version of a title without using a screen reader?  In addition, how would they know whether a website allows for the use, under copyright law, of their own website by someone with a screen reader?”

To state that a feature of your product is legal, and to understand the benefit that the feature would bring to users of the product, but to then allow it to be disabled arbitrarily by third parties strikes me as a company that is attempting to placate the “squeaky wheels” simply because they threaten legal action.

BookFinder.com Journal makes a comparison to the relationship between large-print books and magnifiers.  Should the ability of consumers to use magnifiers while reading be controlled by the publisher (after all, it might be costing them large-print sales).

If you still feel that publishers should have the final say, then consider whether they should have this ability to control works that are in the public domain.  It doesn’t matter whether it is the consumer’s right to use text-to-speech, according to this decision; it only matters that individual consumers cannot respond with the apparent impact that the Writer’s guild can muster.

There has been a similar theme in the bibliographical world lately – rules being put in place that attempt to ignore or even circumvent that which already exists, whether it is Public Domain, Fair Use, or the First Sale doctrine.  OCLC, Google, and now Amazon have all implemented restrictions to their various offerings.  OCLC, to their credit, has stepped back and is in the process of re-evaluating its approach towards licensing records.  Google hasn’t even blinked about restricting access to Google Book items waaay beyond even the tightest of copyright interpretations.  Amazon asserts the rights of users to use text-to-speech, but then allows those with a vested interest against it to control its use.

Yes, there is a pattern to all of this, and we need to figure out how to prevent it from continuing.

The March 2009 issue of Walt Crawford’s Cites & Insights is devoted to a 30 page essay on the Google Books settlement.  His is an opinion that spans many of the issues : he is at once a writer, fair use advocate, a reader, and a library supporter.

found at Walt at Random

A Fire on the Plain is a post by Peter Brantley of the University of California that relates the essence of conversations he has had with several rightsholders who were part of the Google Book Search negotiations.  An exerpt:

From the rightsholders’ perspective, one terminal per library, instead of being stingy, quivered with profligacy. I heard remarked by several individuals (and often enough now to feel it corroborated) that indeed this concession started out far more restricted: either no public access, or starkly limited access – perhaps apocryphally, a single terminal in each State capitol, or one terminal in each city. In short, it was impressed upon me that libraries were lucky to get as much as they did.

As I understand it, rightsholders feared that having unhindered access to books online at libraries might (among other issues) encourage libraries to decelerate buying print books, thereby reducing royalties to authors and profits to publishers. In this equation, more public access = less revenue.

This is not a good sign.  If this is applicable to rightsholders as a group (and be mindful that this is an incredibly small sample of opinion), then the resistance of publishers and other rightsholders is going to increase exponentially when we finally get an e-book reader that becomes the equivalent of what the I-Pod was to e-audio.  Libraries and other organizations need to ensure that Fair Use is respected (and utilized), and that there is a broad understanding of the changes happening to media and culture.

found via Open Access News

The New York Times Blog announced today that they have released an API for their Best Sellers list.  Library programmers should jump on this.  Imagine being able to display information about an item’s rankings – dates, placement, etc. – in your OPAC like you can show book covers, Google Books, etc.

The data only covers June 2008 forward, but they will be extending it back to 1930 within the next few months.

This is a great move by the NYT; their Best Sellers list is considered definitive, and encouraging its use and adaptation means it will continue to be influential.

found via Web4lib (thanks to Steve Toub)

I thought I’d try something new and summarize the software that I use on a regular basis.  I have been thinking about this, as I have recently switched from one software program to another in a couple of areas, and have been thinking about the evolution of the programs I have used over the years.  This may become an annual (or occasional) update, or this may be the only installment.  I also note which items have Portable Apps alternatives, as I use these a great deal.

Here they are:

• Operating Systems : Windows XP is still my primary day-to-day system at home, on my notebook, and at work.  I use Ubuntu linux on a regular basis (I am set up to dual-boot both at home and on my notebook computer), but haven’t yet made the jump.  Yet.  I use Mac OS-X (Leopard) occasionally on my wife’s computer (usually when setting something up for her).
• Web Browsers : Firefox (PortableApps) is my preferred browser (and has been since it was at version 0.6 or so).  I occasionally use Google Chrome, which is definitely faster, but my habitual use of certain add-ons (see below) keeps me from getting comfortable.  I use Internet Explorer 7 when I want to run Windows Update.  My only complaints are occasional memory hog problems with Firefox.
• Firefox Add-Ons : Zotero, Groowe Search Toolbar, Web Developer Toolbar, Operator, Cooliris, Add to Search Bar.  Learn them, use them, love them.
• E-Mail : Thunderbird (PortableApps) is my primary e-mail client, although I feel it needs a good updating (version 3, anyone?).  I use Microsoft Outlook 2003 at work, mainly because we use the calendar features quite a bit.  An add-on that makes Outlook worth using, however, is Xobni (“inbox” spelled backwards).  If you use Outlook, get Xobni – you will not be disappointed.  I am eagerly awaiting a Thunderbird version.
• Office Suites : I recently switched to Go-Oo from OpenOffice 3 (PortableApps).  It wasn’t too hard of a change, as it is an implementation of OpenOffice with some very intelligent add-ons and configuration.  It is very smooth and easy to use, and hasn’t given me any problems yet.  I still use Microsoft Office 2003 at work, but am rapidly switching to Go-Oo for everything but Access.  Even that may change, as MS Access lacks some desired report functionality that exists in the Sun Report Builder.
• Text Editors : I recently switched from SciTE to Notepad++ (PortableApp) when I needed better control over the encoding of the text.  Both are excellent for editing HTML and CSS, as well as editing a variety of text files.
• Web Design : I primarily use a text editor (see above), but when I want something more powerful, I use Amaya, or sometimes Aptana.  If you need a basic WYSIWYG designer, I recommend Komposer (PortableApps).  I use FileZilla (PortableApps) as my FTP client.
• Photo Software : I currently use IrfanView, but suspect that this may change in the near future, as my needs are changing.
• Online Software : I use WordPress for blogging; Gregarius as a blog reader; Gallery for photo storage and viewing; I am trying out OpenGoo for online applications (calendar, tasks, contacts, basic word processing); OpenBiblio for my church’s ILS; Scriblio and Drupal for OPAC replacements (just playing around with them); and TextPattern as a Content Managment System.
• Security : ZoneAlarm firewall; AVG Free anti-virus; Clean-Up!; and HijackThis.
• CD Authoring : I switched from CDBurnerXP to InfraRecorder (PortableApps) earlier this year.  I haven’t tried the newest version of CDBurnerXP, so there may be some switching back in the future.
• Odds and Ends : 7-Zip (PortableApps) for compressing and decompressing all sorts of files; PDF Creator; MarcEdit.

If you are looking for a common thread, there is this:  all of these, except for two of the operating systems, and the software on my work PC, don’t cost anything.  Much of it is Open Source (of which I am an advocate).  You can do a lot with an internet-connected computer, a sub-$100 per year web hosting service, and some trial-and-error experimentation.

I hope this list helps to inform, and perhaps even connects someone else with software that I have grown to enjoy using for everyday tasks.  It has been interesting to see just how much software becomes part of my daily routines, and how much value I get from the above programs.

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