Last week I blogged about the validity of using Second Life in further and higher education, from the very informative and reasoned feedback I got from some of you I’m well on my way to disciple-hood. I think as a ‘new’ method of sharing information it can excel, we are going to see some interesting developments in both the technology of SL and how it is used.
This week I have been scouting around for some useful, albeit more conventional online resources, but there should be something here for most of readers. The three listed below have proven themselves worth a mention, either because the method of information delivery is ambitious or fresh and effective or the information is just good quality content.
First of all, software mapping company Geowise, contacted me about their Instant Atlas product. The statistical and mapping site takes any (preferably large) set of statistical data and uses a variety of graphical illustrations and maps to present that information in new and interesting ways. They aren’t the only company doing this by a long shot, we’ve all seen plenty of Google Earth, flashMapped and MS Live mashups are out there, but I like the way this one gives you a decent amount of control and a good bundle of options to play with.
A great example made available in the demo, is data for Scottish MP expenses, some of the higher figures, according to the Instant Atlas demo, come from those MP’s that live away from the mainland, in geographically large and remote constituencies, one would therefore presume that money is spent on travel? Interestingly the largest single expense total came from a geographically tiny inner-city constituency. I highlight this random example because it was so easy to get this overview of detailed information in a couple of clicks.
I think Geowise have done a good job of showing the tools broad appeal. Whatever your data – if there is the potential to add the geographical context to that information then its surprising how helpful software like this helps with clarity and therefore understanding. I can imagine there is so much scope for products like these from education, to research, business, health - you name it. We’ll see if we can get a more detailed review done in due course and really put it through its paces.
Second up, I’ve been happily listening to the Talking with Talis online resource in the IWR office this week. I’m sure many of you will be aware of the monthly podcasts from the technology company, but for those of the uninitiated, it’s basically a compendium of mp3 file conversations between Talis and that week’s guest speaker. The theme revolves around web 2.0 technologies and their relationship with libraries.
With nearly two years worth of discussion available on the site anyone wanting to brush up on the jargon and trends will do well to start here. The interviews can be a touch chatty and informal but if you skip forward a little the Talis interviewer is good enough to let the experts hold court and share their views. There are some engaging and interesting points that the commentators make, in particular I liked tech author Peter Morville’s discussions about ambient findability and how the authority of sources is a significant factor in search. Whether that is through means that are traditional, using a ranked method like Google or user-contribution like Wikipedia in origin. He points out, “The issue of authority is a controversial and messy one in library circles these days” going on to say “We are in a period of real tension between the traditional notion of expert authority and this celebration of the ‘wisdom of crowds’ and the ‘rise of the amateur’, I tend to come down in the middle, there is a great strength to be tapped from the energy of the millions of people, but at the same time I don’t think that discredits the work of an expert, who has worked and thought about a particular area”.
With this in mind I wonder what Peter would make of The Open Library (TOL) which launched a demo version in mid-July. The incredibly ambitious project (some would argue pipe dream) aims to “build the world’s greatest library, then put it up on the Internet free for all to use and edit”.
This means that founder Aaron Swartz and his TOL team want to use the internet to make available every single book, ever published in every language online. Furthermore, they want everyone to contribute to this; “Not simply "free to the people, "but a product of the people: letting them create and curate its catalogue, contribute to its content, participate in its governance, and have full, free access to its data” the mission statement grandly announces. All very noble stuff, I’m sure you agree.
The project has support from the Internet Archive and the Open Content Alliance, the British Library according to the Beeb seem to be little more guarded about its prospects with Stephen Bury, head of European and American Collections saying “We have always supported digitisation, and the more the merrier. But there’s some scepticism as to whether one day the Open Library might become a commercial site with adverts and so on”
In terms of technical principles and in order to achieve a useable information source, The Open Library team are developing their own cataloguing system or Open Library Number (OLN). A schema called futurelib is being developed which will act in principle like the MARC format. Advice and contributions from all in the library community are welcomed, particularly at this stage.
Like the BBC report, I think it’s also worth mentioning, that even a few years ago, the idea of something like Wikipedia ever really taking off the way it has was fantasy. Yet through the millions of voluntary contributions from its user-base and putting aside some notable problems for a moment, Wikipedia has been a tremendous success.
Are the “public” suitable for a similar role with TOL or could this initiative give a platform for the experts to assert their knowledge, expertise and experience a little?
Perhaps the BL’s sceptical stance is more realistic and The Open Library is just a fanciful notion? Or maybe, we can hope for a Wikipedia-like success, born through the initial efforts of an interested community? It may just depend on experts like you lending a hand…
As ever, please weigh in and let me know your thoughts…
No comments:
Post a Comment