November 2007

 

Public-Access Computer Systems Publications [PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU]; on behalf of; Roy Tennant [tennantr@OCLC.ORG]

PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU                        Sat 1/12/2007

 

Current Cites

 

                                  November 2007

 

                            Edited by [2]Roy Tennant

 

       http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2007/cc07.18.11.html

 

   Contributors: [3]Frank Cervone, Brian Rosenblum, [4]Roy Tennant

            _____________________________________________________

 

   [5]Draft Report of the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic

   Control  Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 30 November

   2007.(http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/news/draft-report.html).

   - I am citing this draft report virtually sight unseen given its likely

   interest for our readers and the fact that we are publishing this issue

   the day of its release. Comments on the draft are being solicited

   through December 15, 2007. Their findings are grouped around five

   central themes: "1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production

   for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing

   of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced

   throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources; 2.

   Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the

   possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique

   materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and,

   thus, underused; 3. Position our technology for the future by

   recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and

   the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize

   that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name

   of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that

   interact with those data over the network in a variety of ways; 4.

   Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation

   of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource

   descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for

   revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist

   among information resources; 5. Strengthen the library profession

   through education and the development of metrics that will inform

   decision-making now and in the future." I urge you to read it, digest,

   and (if so moved) comment on it. - [6]RT

 

   "[7]ARL: A Bimonthly Report: Special Double Issue on University

   Publishing"    (252/253)(June/August

   2007)(http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/br/br252-253.shtml). - The most

   recent issue of the ARL Bimonthly Report follows up on the Ithaka

   report [8]"University Publishing in a Digital Age" (issued in July) to

   focus on the state of university publishing, the evolving role of

   libraries in delivering publishing services, and the relationship

   between libraries, university presses and other stakeholders in the

   scholarly publishing enterprise. In addition to a summary of the

   original Ithaka report, the issue includes an overview of the "The

   Changing Environment of University Publishing" by Karla Hahn, and a

   response to the report by David Shulenberger, who calls for

   universities to develop research "distribution strategies" and provides

   a vision for what those strategies might include. A description of the

   University of Michigan's "commentable" version of the Ithaka report,

   and three case studies of library-based publishing initiatives (the

   Californial Digital Library, the Univeristy of Illinois, and Synergies,

   a multi-institutional Canadian effort) round out this issue. As a

   whole, the issue makes a compelling case for a more active role for

   libraries in scholarly publishing. - BR

 

   "[9]Special Section: Folksonomies"  [10]Bulletin of the American

   Society for Information Science and Technology  34(1)(October/November

   2007): 7-29. (http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-07/neal.html). - This

   special section of four articles plus a substantive introduction by the

   guest editor focus on user tagging and what has been called

   "folksonomies" -- or user-created taxonomies. The articles are an

   interesting mix of simple explanations of why users tag, tag usage in

   Flickr, and others that seek to explain various tagging systems and how

   they may or may not be useful in retrieval. - [11]RT

 

   "[12]Special Section: Functional Requirements for Bibliographic

   Records"  [13]Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science

   and Technology  33(6)(August/September 2007): 6-31.

   (http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Aug-07/). - This special section of the

   Bulletin of the ASIST looks at a number of aspects of the

   [14]Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, a framework for

   bibliographic data published by IFLA. Although the paper itself is

   relatively old (1998), only recently have we seen library catalogs that

   have begun to implement some of the principles laid out in that report.

   From a somewhat gentle introduction to FRBR concepts by Pat Riva, to

   research-based issues and findings by Shawne Miksa (of the MARC Content

   Designation Utilization (MCDU) Project) and others, there is likely

   something here for both the FRBR novice as well as the expert. - [15]RT

 

   Beccaria, Mike, and Dan  Scott. "[16]Fac-Back-OPAC: An Open Source

   Interface to Your Library System"  [17]Computers in Libraries

   27(9)(October

   2007)(http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/oct07/Beccaria_Scott.shtml). -

   The advent of the [18]Solr search server has spawned a number of

   experiments in "next-generation" library catalog systems, not the least

   of which is the "Fac-Back-OPAC" described here. Designed as a backup

   catalog (setting aside for a moment why such a thing is needed), it

   actually provides functionality that most existing ILSs don't, such as

   faceted browsing (the "Fac" part of the name). This article briefly

   describes the system's features, the technology building blocks used,

   and what might be required by any other institution wishing to install

   and use this free open source system. Recommended for those who are

   technically inclined and want to try it out for themselves, or

   decision-makers who supervise such staff. - [19]RT

 

   Greene, Kate. "[20]Searching Video Lectures"  [21]MIT Technology

   Review  (26 November

   2007)(http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/19747/). - This article

   describes the breakthrough [22]MIT Lecture Browser that provides

   full-featured searching and browsing of audio and video content. Using

   automated transcription, indexing, and the ability to drop the user

   into a particular portion of the digital file, the Lecture Browser can

   get users directly to the parts that interest them. When a user has

   navigated to a point of interest, the system follows along in the

   transcribed text in sync with the audio or video similar to the

   bouncing ball of a karaoke machine. Users of digital audio and video

   content have never had it so good. - [23]RT

 

   McDowell, Cat S. "[24]Evaluating Institutional Repository Deployment in

   American Academe Since Early 2005"  [25]D-Lib Magazine

   13(9/10)(September/October

   2007)(http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september07/mcdowell/09mcdowell.html). -

   In this article, the author provides a follow-up to the work done by

   [26]Lynch and Lippincott in documenting the state of institutional

   repositories. While using a different methodology and a more rigorous

   definition of institutional repository than Lynch and Lippincott did,

   the study finds many similar trends in how institutional repositories

   are being adopted and used. Perhaps not surprisingly, this study found

   that while new institutional repository deployments are leveling off,

   the most significant area of growth in deployments has been at smaller

   institutions. Other interesting findings include the observation that

   contributions to institutional repositories are still greatest, from

   both relative and absolute perspectives, at large research

   universities, but student work products account for the majority of

   items in these institutional repositories; faculty contributions to

   institutional repositories still tend to be difficult to acquire. -

   [27]FC

     __________________________________________________________________

 

   Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at

   WebJunction.org. (c) Copyright 2007 by Roy Tennant

   [31]Creative Commons License

 

References

 

   Visible links

   1. http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/

   2. http://roytennant.com/

   3. http://www.cervone.com/

   4. http://roytennant.com/

   5. http://www.loc.gov/bibliographic-future/news/draft-report.html

   6. http://roytennant.com/

   7. http://www.arl.org/resources/pubs/br/br252-253.shtml

   8. http://www.ithaka.org/strategic-services/university-publishing

   9. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-07/neal.html

  10. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/

  11. http://roytennant.com/

  12. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Aug-07/

  13. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/

  14. http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr.htm

  15. http://roytennant.com/

  16. http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/oct07/Beccaria_Scott.shtml

  17. http://www.infotoday.com/cilmag/default.shtml

  18. http://lucene.apache.org/solr

  19. http://roytennant.com/

  20. http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/19747/

  21. http://www.technologyreview.com/

  22. http://web.sls.csail.mit.edu/lectures/

  23. http://roytennant.com/

  24. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september07/mcdowell/09mcdowell.html

  25. http://www.dlib.org/

  26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1045/september2005-lynch

  27. http://www.cervone.com/

  28. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer

  29. http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer

  30. http://webjunction.org/

  31. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

December 2007

 

Public-Access Computer Systems Publications [PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU]; on behalf of; Roy Tennant [tennantr@OCLC.ORG]

PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU                        Tue 25/12/2007

 

 

Current Cites

 

                                  December 2007

 

                            Edited by [2]Roy Tennant

 

       http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2007/cc07.18.12.html

 

   Contributors: [3]Charles W. Bailey, Jr., Keri Cascio, [4]Leo Robert

   Klein, Brian Rosenblum, [5]Roy Tennant

            _____________________________________________________

 

   [6]The Code4Lib Journal  (1)(17 December 2007) - This is the inaugural

   issue of the Code4Lib Journal, and if the beginning is any indication

   it will definitely be worth following for anyone interested in the

   topics we try to cover in Current Cites. Largely written by the library

   coders who are building new kinds of systems and infrastructure for

   libraries, you can't get any closer to the technology action without

   getting hit with shards of subroutines. The articles in this first

   include "Beyond OPAC 2.0: Library Catalog as Versatile Discovery

   Platform," "Facet-Based Search and Navigation With LCSH: Problems and

   Opportunities," "The Rutgers Workflow Management System: Migrating a

   Digital Object Management Utility to Open Source,"Communicat: The Next

   Generation Catalog That Almost Was"," "Connecting the Real to the

   Representational: Historical Demographic Data in the Town of Pullman,

   1880-1940,". Add an editorial introduction, a book review, and a

   column, and there is much here to edify and entertain not just the

   geekiest among us, but civilians too. May it live long and prosper. -

   [7]RT

 

   "[8]Creativity Support Tools: Accelerating Discovery and Innovation"

   [9]Communications of the ACM  50(12): 20-32.

   (http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1323688.1323689). - Ben Shneiderman,

   professor of Computer Science at the University of Maryland and author

   of the classic "Designing the User Interface", sees a promising future

   in programming and visualizations tools. He identifies a shift from

   tools that simply aid productivity to tools that promote creativity

   itself. These new "creativity support tools" can lead to forms of

   expression and collaboration not previously possible. The only catch is

   that in order to build these tools, we need to better understand what

   creativity is and how it can be measured. No small task. But the

   benefit is an environment, as Shneiderman puts it, where "eager novices

   are performing like seasoned masters and the grandmasters are producing

   startling results". - [10]LRK

 

   "[11]Special Section -- Virtual Reference Services"  [12]Bulletin of

   the American Society for Information Science and Technology

   34(2)(December/January

   2008)(http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Dec-07/Bulletin_DecJan08.pdf). -

   This special section of the Bulletin of the American Society for

   Information Science and Technology addresses the issues affecting

   virtual reference services in libraries. We are still asking: who's

   using these services, who's not using these services, and why? Joe

   Janes gives us insight into the frustrations of virtual reference,

   including the confusion of license agreements, staffing levels, and

   marketing. R. David Lankes introduces us to "StoryStarters," a site

   that connected experts and bloggers with question askers. For

   evaluating online reference services, we turn to Jeffery Pomerantz. He

   looks at evaluation from the perspective of library staff and library

   users. Pnina Shachaf provides us with an environmental scan of

   professional and ethical standards and how they are (or are not)

   applied to virtual reference services. In the last article in the

   section, Lynn Silipigni Connaway, Marie L. Radford, and Timothy J.

   Dickey join together to study the non-users of virtual reference

   services while working together on an IMLS project called Seeking

   Sunchonicity. They found that non-users value personal relationships

   and privacy in their reference transactions, and weren't sure if

   virtual reference would fill these requirements for them. In all, this

   special section of the ASIST Bulletin is a must for those librarians

   considering a virtual reference service, as well as those with

   established programs. - KC

 

   Farkas, Meredith. "[13]The Bloggers Among Us: A survey of the library

   blogosphere shows the mainstreaming of the medium"  [14]Library

   Journal  (15 December

   2007)(http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6510669.html). - Farkas,

   a long-time and well-respected library blogger, surveyed library

   bloggers (also called by some the "biblioblogosphere") to get a better

   sense of who is blogging and why. Having performed a previous survey,

   she compares numbers to detect trends. To no one's surprise, Farkas

   found many more bloggers than before, and women have begun to close the

   blogging gap with their male counterparts. The number of public

   librarians blogging have also increased in comparison to academic

   librarians. Many more statistics as well as insights gleaned from the

   data can be found in this article that tells us a lot about who we are

   as a blogging community. - [15]RT

 

   Johnson, Richard K., and Judy  Luther. [16]The E-only Tipping Point for

   Journals: What's Ahead in the Print-to-Electronic Transition Zone

   Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries,

   2007.(http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/Electronic_Transition.pdf). - Based on

   interviews with librarians at research libraries and representatives of

   various publishing industry sectors (excluding commercial publishers),

   a literature review, and their own extensive experience, the well-known

   authors of this report predict that the end is near for the print

   journal: "The role of the printed journal in the institutional

   marketplace faces a steep decline in the coming 5 to 10 years. Print

   journals will exist mainly to address specialized needs, users, or

   business opportunities. Financial imperatives will draw libraries

   first--and ultimately publishers also--toward a tipping point where it

   no longer makes sense to subscribe to or publish printed versions of

   most journals." - [17]CB

 

   Morgan, Eric Lease. "[18]Today's Digital Information Landscape"

   [19]Musings on Information and Librarianship  (01 December

   2007)(http://infomotions.com/musings/digital-landscape/). - Eric Lease

   Morgan of the University Libraries of Notre Dame wrote a lecture for

   the University of North Texas on the landscape of today's library in a

   digital word. He puts into words something that I've recently addressed

   in a workshop for cataloging electronic resources: "Libraries are still

   about the processes of collection, preservation, organization,

   dissemination, and sometimes evaluation of data and information. While

   the mediums, environments, and tools have dramatically changed, the

   problems and services the profession addresses remain the same." In

   this lecture, Morgan brings together XML, indexing, social software,

   and open source catalogs and repositories. A great introduction to the

   issues that technical services departments are facing right now. I wish

   I could have attended this lecture and listened to the question and

   answer period! - KC

 

   Patry, William. "[20]What Does It Mean to Be Pro-IP?"  [21]The Patry

   Copyright Blog  (10 December

   2007)(http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2007/12/what-does-it-mean-to-be-

   pro-ip.html). - In the U.S. House of Representatives, Reps. John

   Conyers, Jr. (D-MI), Lamar Smith (R-TX), Howard Berman (D-CA), and nine

   other House members have introduced the "Prioritizing Resources and

   Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2007" (PRO IP). In this

   lengthy posting on the PRO IP bill, noted copyright lawyer William

   Patry provides a trenchant analysis of its main provisions. Examining

   the proposed statutory damages changes in Sec. 104, Patry says: "Under

   this approach, for one CD the minimum award for non-innocent

   infringement must be $18,750, for a CD that sells in some stores at an

   inflated price of $18.99 and may be had for much less from amazon.com

   or iTunes. The maximum amount of $150,000 then becomes three million,

   seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars per CD. Now multiple that

   times a mere ten albums, and one gets a glimpse at the staggering

   amount that will be routinely sought, not just in suits filed, but more

   importantly in thousands for cease and desist letters, where

   grandmothers and parents are shaken down for the acts of their wayward

   offspring." - [22]CB

 

   Rossner, Mike, Heather  Van Epps, and Emma  Hill. "[23]Show Me the

   Data"  [24]The Journal of Cell Biology  179(6)(17 December

   2007)(http://www.jcb.org/cgi/doi/10.1083/jcb.200711140). - As the

   authors note, the journal impact factors calculated and published by

   Thomson Scientific have a considerable influence on the scientific

   community, influencing grant applications as well as hiring, salary and

   tenure decisions. Yet the community has little understanding of how

   those impact factors are determined. Criticisms of impact factors are

   nothing new (and are summarized here), but this editorial goes beyond

   that to raise serious questions about the integrity of the underlying

   data itself. Unable to independently validate the accuracy of Thomson's

   calculations, the authors discovered numerous errors in the incomplete

   data provided by Thomson. In the end, they were unable to properly

   assess the reliability of impact factors because the full data remains

   hidden. This editorial is both a rejection of Thomson Scientific's

   "ill-defined and manifestly unscientific" numbers, and a call for more

   open and transparent access to citation data. - BR

 

   Weiss, Rick. "[25]Measure Would Require Free Access to Results of

   NIH-Funded Research"  [26]Washington Post  (21 December 2007): A33.

   (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/20/AR2007

   122002115.html). - Open access advocates got an early Christmas present

   this year as the U.S. Congress passed the "[27]Consolidated

   Appropriations Act, 2008" with the provision for an NIH open access

   mandate intact. The mandate states: "The Director of the National

   Institutes of Health shall require that all investigators funded by the

   NIH submit or have submitted for them to the National Library of

   Medicine's PubMed Central an electronic version of their final,

   peer-reviewed manuscripts upon acceptance for publication, to be made

   publicly available no later than 12 months after the official date of

   publication: Provided, That the NIH shall implement the public access

   policy in a manner consistent with copyright law." President Bush is

   expected to sign the bill shortly. - [28]CB

     __________________________________________________________________

 

   Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at

   WebJunction.org.

   (c) Copyright 2007 by Roy Tennant

   [32]Creative Commons License

 

References

 

   Visible links

   1. http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/

   2. http://roytennant.com/

   3. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

   4. http://leoklein.com/

   5. http://roytennant.com/

   6. http://journal.code4lib.org/

   7. http://roytennant.com/

   8. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1323688.1323689

   9. http://www.acm.org/cacm/

  10. http://leoklein.com/

  11. http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Dec-07/Bulletin_DecJan08.pdf

  12. http://www.asis.org/bulletin.html

  13. http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6510669.html

  14. http://www.libraryjournal.com/

  15. http://roytennant.com/

  16. http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/Electronic_Transition.pdf

  17. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  18. http://infomotions.com/musings/digital-landscape/

  19. http://infomotions.com/musings/

  20.

http://williampatry.blogspot.com/2007/12/what-does-it-mean-to-be-pro-ip.html

  21. http://williampatry.blogspot.com/

  22. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  23. http://www.jcb.org/cgi/doi/10.1083/jcb.200711140

  24. http://www.jcb.org/

  25.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/20/AR2007122002

115.html

  26. http://www.washingtonpost.com/

  27. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.02764:

  28. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  29. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer

  30. http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer

  31. http://webjunction.org/

  32. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

January 2008

 

Public-Access Computer Systems Publications [PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU]; on behalf of; Roy Tennant [tennantr@OCLC.ORG]

PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU        Fri 1/02/2008

 

Current Cites

 

                                 January 2008

 

                           Edited by [2]Roy Tennant

 

        http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2008/cc08.19.1.html

 

   Contributors: [3]Charles W. Bailey, Jr., [4]Frank Cervone, [5]Susan

   Gibbons, Jim Ronningen, Brian Rosenblum, [6]Roy Tennant

            _____________________________________________________

 

   [7]The Horizon Report: 2008 Edition  Austin, TX: The New Media

   Consortium & the Educause Learning Initiative,

   2008.(http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2008-Horizon-Report.pdf). - The Horizon

   Project brings together a group of knowledgeable individuals (36 for

   this year, including Cliff Lynch of CNI) to discuss, research, and

   decide on which technologies will become important in "learning-focused

   organizations" in three time horizons: 1) a year or less, 2) two to

   three years, and 3) four to five years. The process for coming up with

   this list of technologies seems thorough and thoughtful, and is

   highlighted both in prefatory comments as well as in a section of the

   report devoted to describing the methodology. There are two

   technologies identified in each time horizon: 1) One year or less:

   grassroots video and collaboration webs, 2) Two to three years:mobile

   broadband and data mashups, and 3) Four to five years: collective

   intelligence and social operating systems. Each technology is

   highlighted with an overview, its relevance for the educational

   enterprise, examples of the technology in use in learning environments,

   and further reading. Although weighing in at only 33 printed pages, one

   could spend days reading about and exploring these technologies. The

   report also discusses "megatrends" that have become evident after five

   years of producing these reports. Highly recommended. - [8]RT

 

   "[9]Breakthrough Ideas for 2008"  [10]Harvard Business Review

   86(2)(February

   2008)(http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/flatmm/hbrextras/20

   0802/list/). - Though not about libraries or librarians, there is

   nevertheless much for the modern librarian to chew on in this

   wide-ranging list of 20 transformations signaling a "gathering upheaval

   in the way businesses function and how leaders guide them." Many of the

   topics and themes are technological and relate to new channels for

   communication and the flow of information--social networking, online

   gaming, virtual worlds, the metaverse, metadata and privacy, P2P

   networks, and cybercrime, among others (open access, alas, is not

   mentioned). Libraries have certainly begun to recognize the importance

   and value of many of these technologies and issues, but it is

   instructive to get a snapshot of how they are emerging in other

   contexts. Libraries might also do well to ponder some of the

   non-technological ideas presented here, focusing on improving the

   effectiveness of organizations and the quality of the workplace through

   "novel operational models, alternate realities for accomplishing work

   and interacting with customers, the exaltation of collaborative

   technologies, and updated metrics for evaluating performance." Topics

   range from a discussion of the importance of exercise (with the

   suggestion that stationary bicycles be put under every workstation so

   employees can exercise their legs while catching up on email) to new

   models for decision-making and the changing role of experts within the

   organization. - BR

 

   Bailey, Jr., Charles W. [11]Institutional Repositories, Tout de

   Suite  (2008)(http://www.digital-scholarship.org/ts/irtoutsuite.pdf). -

   If you've been looking for a good, introductory bibliography on

   institutional repositories, this is it. In 10 pages, Bailey provides

   sources that can answer questions related to what institutional

   repositories are, why institutions might want one, what self-archiving

   is, author's rights, software for implementing repositories, issues

   related to obtaining repository deposits, general information on how to

   find repositories, as well as suggestions for further reading. Highly

   recommended for the person just getting into repositories or for those

   occasions where you need to bring someone up to speed quickly. - [12]FC

 

   Borgman, Christine L. Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information,

   Infrastructure, and the Internet    Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. -

   In this book, [13]Christine L. Borgman, Professor in the Department of

   Information Studies at UCLA's Graduate School of Education and

   Information Science, provides a detailed and up-to-date analysis of the

   scholarly communication system and the issues that it faces. It is a

   masterful work of scholarship that is unique in its clarity, coherence,

   and breath and depth of treatment of this important topic. As a

   scholarly treatise, it is not a book for the casual reader; however, it

   offers rich rewards. Borgman pays particular attention to data, and,

   with the emergence of e-science and other e-disciplines and the massive

   datasets that they can generate, this is a challenging area that will

   only grow in importance. Inside Higher Education has published an

   [14]interview with Borgman, where she discusses her book. Highly

   recommended. - [15]CB

 

   Breeding, Marshall. "[16]Perceptions 2007: An International Survey of

   Library Automation"    (January 9,

   2008)(http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl). - This

   electronic only publication provides a snapshot of the perceptions of

   library systems and library system vendors from a library point of

   view. By investigating various dimensions of customer satisfaction

   through questions to libraries about their current systems, their ILS

   (integrated library system) vendor, customer support services of

   vendors, and the likelihood the library would purchase another ILS from

   their current vendor, Breeding provides a perspective on library

   systems that isn't often discussed. Used in conjunction with Breeding's

   annual "Automated Systems Marketplace" article in Library Journal

   (http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6429251.html), these two

   pieces provide a comprehensive look at the state of ILS' marketplace

   today. - [17]FC

 

   Centre for Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future,

   University College London. [18]Information Behaviour of the Researcher

   of the Future  (11 January

   2008)(http://www.bl.uk/news/pdf/googlegen.pdf). - A very interested

   study of the "Google generation" (those born after 1993) and how they

   are likely to access and use digital resources in the future. The

   report is full of very valuable insights that in some cases support the

   stereotypes of the "Google generation" and in other cases forces us to

   reconsider our assumptions. The report includes a glimpse as to what

   the information environment might be like in 2017 and highlights the

   challenges that are ahead for information professionals. This piece

   makes for an excellent text around which to engage the library staff in

   discussions about how your library will need to adapt to the rising

   "Google generation." - [19]SG

 

   Ferreira, Miguel, Eloy  Rodrigues, and Ana Alice  Baptista, et.

   al."[20]Carrots and Sticks: Some Ideas on How to Create a Successful

   Institutional Repository"  [21]D-Lib Magazine  14(1/2)(January/February

   2008)(http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january08/ferreira/01ferreira.html). -

   Anyone who has implemented an institutional repository knows the story:

   you build it and mostly they don't come. It's one thing to have an IR,

   it's quite another to fill it. There have been a number of [22]previous

   articles on this phenomenon and what to do about it, but this

   institution in Portugal has landed on a strategy that has worked for

   them -- you dangle the money carrot. That is, the dean of the

   University of Minho would award financial incentives to academic

   departments for depositing their research output in the repository.

   They also used other strategies, most notably adding additional

   functions onto their DSpace platform, but the financial incentive

   appears to have been the most effective according to this article.

   Recommended for anyone laboring to fill their repository. - [23]RT

 

   Kwon, Nahyun, and Vicki L.  Gregory. "[24]The Effects of Librarians'

   Behavioral Performance on User Satisfaction in Chat Reference

   Services"  [25]Reference & User Services Quarterly  42(2)(Winter

   2007): 137-148.

   (http://rusq.org/2008/01/06/the-effects-of-librarians-behavioral-perfor

   mance-on-user-satisfaction-in-chat-reference-services-2/). - OMG! The

   librarian's a bot! No, this article doesn't say anything of the sort

   but reading about effective virtual reference librarian behavior can

   certainly send one's thoughts in that direction. The user satisfaction

   survey results shown here support the assertion that following RUSA

   (Reference and User Services Association) guidelines for

   approachability, interest, listening/inquiring, searching and followup

   makes for a better reference interaction online as it does in person.

   But when the interface isn't face to face, following these guidelines

   without any additional personalization keeps automated response firmly

   in the realm of possibility. (Or perhaps virtual reference outsourcing

   to Bangalore is a more immediate concern.) Worth reading as a refresher

   on benchmark behavior for reference librarians, but also one must read

   between the lines: what value does the librarian add that can't be had

   faster and cheaper by other means? - JR

 

   Wolven, Robert. "[26]In Search of a New Model"  [27]netConnect  (15

   January

   2008)(http://www.libraryjournal.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&artic

   leID=CA6514921). - Robert Wolven of Columbia University, who is

   well-respected for his thoughtful contributions on issues of importance

   to the profession, does not disappoint in this netConnect piece. Taking

   on library cataloging in an age of transformative change, he begins by

   describing our existing "consensus model" of cataloging, considers

   whether cataloging has changed in recent years, then moves swiftly into

   considering where we need to go in the future. For my money, this is

   one piece you simply shouldn't miss, not with all the current ferment

   around cataloging and how we should be doing it. - [28]RT

     __________________________________________________________________

 

   Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at

   WebJunction.org.

   (c) Copyright 2008 by Roy Tennant

   [32]Creative Commons License

 

References

 

   Visible links

   1. http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/

   2. http://roytennant.com/

   3. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

   4. http://www.cervone.com/

   5. http://www.educause.edu/content.asp?page_id=750&ID=115655&bhcp=1

   6. http://roytennant.com/

   7. http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2008-Horizon-Report.pdf

   8. http://roytennant.com/

   9.

http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/flatmm/hbrextras/200802/list/

  10. http://www.hbr.org/

  11. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/ts/irtoutsuite.pdf

  12. http://www.cervone.com/

  13. http://polaris.gseis.ucla.edu/cborgman/

  14. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/11/14/borgman

  15. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  16. http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl

  17. http://www.cervone.com/

  18. http://www.bl.uk/news/pdf/googlegen.pdf

  19. http://www.educause.edu/content.asp?page_id=750&ID=115655&bhcp=1

  20. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january08/ferreira/01ferreira.html

  21. http://www.dlib.org/

  22. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january05/foster/01foster.html

  23. http://roytennant.com/

  24.

http://rusq.org/2008/01/06/the-effects-of-librarians-behavioral-performance-

on-user-satisfaction-in-chat-reference-services-2/

  25. http://rusq.org/

  26.

http://www.libraryjournal.com/index.asp?layout=articlePrint&articleID=CA6514

921

  27. http://www.libraryjournal.com/toc-archive/2008/20080115.html?pub_id=nc

  28. http://roytennant.com/

  29. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer

  30. http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer

  31. http://webjunction.org/

  32. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

February 2008

 

Public-Access Computer Systems Publications [PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU]; on behalf of; Roy Tennant [tennantr@OCLC.ORG]

PACS-P@LISTSERV.UH.EDU                        Fri 29/02/2008

 

Current Cites

 

                               February 2008

 

                          Edited by [2]Roy Tennant

 

        http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/2008/cc08.19.2.html

 

   Contributors: [3]Charles W. Bailey, Jr., Keri Cascio, [4]Frank Cervone,

   [5]Leo Robert Klein, Brian Rosenblum, [6]Karen G. Schneider

            _____________________________________________________

 

   Gustafson, Aaron. "[7]Beyond DOCTYPE: Web Standards, Forward

   Compatibility, and IE8"  [8]A List Apart Magazine  (251) (21 January

   2008) (http://alistapart.com/articles/beyonddoctype/). - Nothing like a

   "tag fight" among web developers to start off the year right. In this

   case, it's about a tag that Microsoft wants people to add to their web

   pages so that IE8, Microsoft's new up-and-coming browser, will know

   whether to render a page in "standards mode" or in "quirks mode". The

   article discusses the rationale behind this "version targeting" in a

   relatively favorable light. It's in the 200 or so comments that follow

   that you can savor some of the less-than-favorable reaction. Digital

   Web kindly provides [9]links to further heated discussion. - [10]LRK

 

   Guterman, Lila. "Celebrations and Tough Questions Follow Harvard's Move

   to Open Access"  [11]The Chronicle of Higher Education   (21 February

   2008) - The [12]adoption of an open access mandate by Harvard's Faculty

   of Arts and Sciences has received worldwide notice, but it is likely to

   have an especially strong impact in the U.S. Here's an excerpt from the

   [13]mandate: "The Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University is

   committed to disseminating the fruits of its research and scholarship

   as widely as possible. In keeping with that commitment, the Faculty

   adopts the following policy: Each Faculty member grants to the

   President and Fellows of Harvard College permission to make available

   his or her scholarly articles and to exercise the copyright in those

   articles. In legal terms, the permission granted by each Faculty member

   is a nonexclusive, irrevocable, paid-up, worldwide license to exercise

   any and all rights under copyright relating to each of his or her

   scholarly articles, in any medium, and to authorize others to do the

   same, provided that the articles are not sold for a profit. The policy

   will apply to all scholarly articles written while the person is a

   member of the Faculty except for any articles completed before the

   adoption of this policy and any articles for which the Faculty member

   entered into an incompatible licensing or assignment agreement before

   the adoption of this policy. The Dean or the Dean's designate will

   waive application of the policy for a particular article upon written

   request by a Faculty member explaining the need." Guterman reports on

   reactions to the mandate, noting that publishers' criticisms have been

   "muted." As you would expect, [14]Open Access News has extensively

   covered this development, and it is the best place to get further

   information (especially see the [15]February 10, 2008 and [16]February

   17, 2008 OAN archives). - [17]CB

 

   Hahn, Trudi Bellardo. "Mass Digitization: Implication for Preserving

   the Scholarly Record"  [18]Library Resources & Technical Services

   52(1) (January 2008): 18-26. - "Digitization is not preservation." This

   is a sentence that I've heard countless times at digitization workshops

   over the years. Trudi Bellardo Hahn takes libraries to task for

   allowing Google and other for-profit vendors to make the rules for the

   mass digitization, and ultimately preservation, of our scholarly

   record. Based on a talk she did in 2006 at the Eighth Annual Symposium

   on Scholarly Communication, Hahn cautions us to pause and think a

   little bit more about five areas: pace of developments, risk versus

   vision, justification for digitizing books, trust, and leadership. She

   argues that libraries should look at who's driving the car of mass

   digitization, and to make sure that they are more involved in every

   step of the process, especially when it comes to digitization

   leadership. - KC

 

   Hahn, Karla L. "[19]Talk About Talking About New Models of Scholarly

   Communication"  [20]The Journal of Electronic Publishing  11(1) (Winter

   2008) (http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0011.108). - "Research

   has effectively not happened until it has been communicated," Karla

   Hann writes at the beginning of this article. This sounds like a good

   scholarly communication advocate's unequivocal answer to the riddle "if

   a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it

   make a sound?" To look at the analogy another way, librarians have been

   hearing trees of the scholarly publishing forest falling all around

   them, but many faculty remain deaf to these changes--although the

   recent OA vote by Harvard's faculty (see elsewhere in this issue of

   Current Cites) suggests that may be changing. In any case, Hahn makes

   it clear that scholarly communication is not just a library issue, but

   one for the research and scholarly community as a whole. Broad change

   can only occur with the support of those who produce and use

   scholarship, and Hahn calls on the library community to accelerate its

   efforts to engage scholars in dialogue about scholarly communication

   issues. She discusses six "dangers in our current moment" and offers

   six suggested topics for campus dialogue. Part of the Winter 2008

   special issue of JEP devoted of the theme of [21]Communications,

   Scholarly Communications and the Advanced Research Infrastructure. - BR

 

   Rieger, Oya Y. [22]Preservation in the Age of Large-Scale Digitization:

   A White Paper  Washington, DC: Council on Library and Information

   Resources, 2008. (http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub141/pub141.pdf).

   - In this white paper, [23]Oya Y. Rieger, Interim Assistant University

   Librarian for Digital Library and Information Technologies at the

   Cornell University Library, takes a look at four mass digitization

   projects (Google Book Search, Microsoft Live Search Books, Open Content

   Alliance, and the Million Book Project) with particular attention to

   the long-term access and preservation issues that they raise. She

   investigates the impact that mass digitization programs will have on

   library book collections, and she offers 13 recommendations for

   libraries engaged in such programs to consider. In the recommendation

   section, she says: "Formulating a joint action plan by the cultural

   institutions is desirable and will help clarify commonly debated

   aspects of LSDIs [Large-Scale Digitization Initiatives]. It will be

   important to bring Google and Microsoft, as well as other commercial

   leaders, into this conversation. Participating libraries should take

   advantage of the partners' meetings organized by Google and Microsoft

   to present and discuss the community's digital preservation concerns

   and plans. However, it is important to acknowledge that there are

   institutional differences in opinion, digital library infrastructures,

   funding models, and strategic goals." - [24]CB

 

   Schaffhauser, Dian. "[25]Digital crisis: Motion pictures may fade to

   black"  [26]Computerworld  (8 February, 2008)

   (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBas

   ic&articleId=9061099). - Contrary to naive claims that since disk

   drives are inexpensive digital archiving is cheap, this article in

   Computerworld explores the two most pressing issues affecting digital

   preservation of films created in Hollywood: a lack of standards during

   both the content creation and storage phases and the high costs of

   on-going digital preservation. This article should be a wake up call to

   us in the information professions that we face the same types of issues

   and need to move much more quickly in creating and adopting standards

   as well as forming partnerships to spread the responsibility of digital

   preservation efforts given the unsustainability, both technologically

   and monetarily, of many of our current models. - [27]FC

 

   Zemon, Candy. "[28]Candy Zemon Talks With Talis About NCIP"

   [29]Panlibus  (14 February 2008)

   (http://blogs.talis.com/panlibus/archives/2008/02/candy_zemon_tal.php).

   - Aside from the glancing interest of an acronym within an acronym,

   NCIP -- the NISO Circulation Interchange Protocol -- may not seem

   exciting to those not involved in its implementation. But in this

   47-minute podcast by the Talis software company (part of a series worth

   subscribing to), Candy Zemon of Polaris Library Systems, who also

   chairs the NCIP Implementors Group, gives us a friendly layman's stroll

   through not only this standard's history but the broader, complex,

   often frustrating yet important world of standards. Zemon talks about

   why NCIP, first proposed in 2002, has yet to achieve wide

   implementation and in doing so addresses why interoperability is

   important. Zemon also touches on the new Digital Library Federation

   (DLF) ILS and Discovery Systems group. - [30]KGS

     __________________________________________________________________

 

   Current Cites - ISSN: 1060-2356 is hosted by the community at

   WebJunction.org.

   (c) Copyright 2008 by Roy Tennant

   [34]Creative Commons License

 

References

 

   Visible links

   1. http://lists.webjunction.org/currentcites/

   2. http://roytennant.com/

   3. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

   4. http://www.cervone.com/

   5. http://leoklein.com/

   6. http://freerangelibrarian.com/

   7. http://alistapart.com/articles/beyonddoctype/

   8. http://alistapart.com/

   9.

http://www.digital-web.com/news/2008/01/IE8_Version_Targeting_causes_quite_a

_stir

  10. http://leoklein.com/

  11. http://chronicle.com/

  12.

http://chronicle.com/news/article/3943/harvard-faculty-adopts-open-access-re

quirement

  13. http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~secfas/February_2008_Agenda.pdf

  14. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html

  15. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008_02_10_fosblogarchive.html

  16. http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008_02_17_fosblogarchive.html

  17. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  18. http://www.ala.org/ala/alcts/pubs/librestechsvc/lrts_home.cfm

  19. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0011.108

  20. http://www.journalofelectronicpublishing.org/

  21. http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0011.112

  22. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub141/pub141.pdf

  23. http://www.library.cornell.edu/dlit/rieger/

  24. http://www.digital-scholarship.org/

  25.

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&art

icleId=9061099

  26. http://www.computerworld.com/

  27. http://www.cervone.com/

  28. http://blogs.talis.com/panlibus/archives/2008/02/candy_zemon_tal.php

  29. http://blogs.talis.com/panlibus/

  30. http://freerangelibrarian.com/

  31. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer

  32. http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer

  33. http://webjunction.org/

  34. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx