Thursday, January 12, 2006

TWiL2.0: Library 2.0 Weekly Round-up

Here is the second weekly round-up for Library 2.0 commentary and events. It's been a busy week and as some of my previous posts indicate I am both a bit overwhelmed and a bit confused by all that has been said. Nevertheless, here is what was posted this week (1/6/2006 - 1/12/2006).

The week was nearly bookended by the publication of two important documents. First, Walt Crawford published a special issue of Cites & Insights on the topic of Library 2.0. Second, Stephen Abrams published his Web 2.0 – Huh?! Library 2.0, Librarian 2.0 (PDF file) just in last few days. Walt Crawford's document has already been discussed widely and certainly the same should happen to Stephen Abrams'.

This week, we also find that Jessamyn West has put online a presentation she gave entitled, Tech Trends in Libraries: the Good News and the Bad News and why library 2.0 is no big deal [and not that new], which is worth looking at.

You may also want to look at this diagram posted on Flickr by Thomas Brevik that represents a model of Library 2.0. He has invited comments and suggestions and the model surely deserves them.

Also, several events were announced over the last seven days:


Now, on to the posts. One of the big topics this week was the meaning of Library 2.0 and one of the strongest posts on this topic was made by John Blyberg, 11 reasons why Library 2.0 exists and matters. However, from a different perspective, we also saw Meredith Farkas' post, Label 2.0, which put forth the position that moving forward and making improvements to libraries is more important than the Library 2.0 concept itself.

These were only two of the many excellent posts made over this past week. Stepping back from them all, I was able to see that some agreement among posters can be found, but mostly there is a wide variety of opinions and positions expressed. Over at the Panlibus we find Library 2.0, and a penchant for lists. From Chris Armstrong at info NeoGnostic comes Meaning(s) of Library 2.0 and in response this post, again from Panlibus. Jenny Levine posted What Is New about Library 2.0 over at the ALA Techsource Blog; Richard Ackerman responds to Jenny's post and offers some of his own thoughts on Library 2.0 in his post, Welcome. You've Got New Library. Luke at Gordian Knot posted Two point oh, which puts forth the idea of the "read-write library." Thomas Brevik gave his views on the topic in his post, What do I think Library 2.0 is?, which appears on his new English-language blog. At Endless Hybrids, Jeff Berry discusses how he believes Library 2.0 is dangerous. Steve Lawson talks about the Library 2.0 hangover, which makes some insightful comments and connections (I particularly enjoyed this one). Finally, Steven Cohen posted L2 Ain't Nothing Without W2, which is a response to Dion Hinchcliffe's look at Web 2.0 spinoffs.

The disagreements found in these posts were also addressed this week. David King, in his post, Confrontational Aspects of Library 2.0 Discussed, points out some that caught his eye and offers a reason. Meredith Farkas makes an excellent post on this topic as well, suggesting that instead of arguing over a definition of a term ,we should move towards implementing some of the ideas that make up Library 2.0 and sharing our success stories.

This is only a selection of the posts made in the last seven days. As I went through the posts I collected this week, I realized I wouldn't have the time to point to all of them, even though others deserved to be pointed out. Even now, I haven't provided many comments on the selections I did choose. Hopefully, they will speak for themselves.

But, in order to provide a little commentary, I would like to end with two quotes. The first helps me as I struggle with my own inconsistency on the topic of Library 2.0, which has ranged from enthusiastic to a bit wary. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one. The second is a quote of a quote (of a quote?) that very nearly reflects where my own thoughts are heading now.

"Since the fall, I’ve pretty much been processing my thoughts about Library 2.0 on this blog in real-time. If one is going for ideological consistency, it’s probably not the best way to do things, but it is the most human way. I’ve been learning and reflecting and sharing those reflections with you."

-- Meredith Farkas

"Roy Tennant (and, indirectly, Dan Chudnov): "Moving beyond silo-ized "destination" systems to expose our information and services in a wide variety of methods to a diverse set of consuming applications is a good thing.... If that's Library 2.0, then so be it. Call it whatever you want, just stop anguishing over it. As Dan Chudnov says, "Now stop boring us, and help build it."

-- from Walt Crawford's C&I issue



And with that, we conclude another week of Library 2.0. Again, I would like to invite comments and suggestions. I mentioned earlier this week that I might quit doing these weekly round-ups, but I've decided to keep at it. It proved to be good fun. However, being a full-time student and working two part-time jobs, I'm not sure I have the time to really delve into the topic like I tried to do this week. I made the mistake of trying to track too many conversations and I think the round-up this week reflects that; I would prefer to delve into some theme a bit deeper instead of skimming the surface. So, look for next week to have a different format and a different focus, but for it to still be about this idea we call Library 2.0.

Technorati Tags: ,
Posted by at 1/12/2006 11:18:00 PM

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)