Tim,
My first thought about tags and local library catalogs runs something
along the line of "let's just steal them from LibraryThing!". However, I
searched for a few records from our catalog in LibraryThing, and was
disappointed by the complete lack of overlap between our books and those
in LibraryThing. Do you have any idea of the coverage of non-fiction,
research materials in LT? Have you done any projects to look at overlap
with a research institution (or with WorldCat)?
-emily lynema
NCSU Libraries
Tim Spalding wrote:
> Pardon the multi-response:
>
>> David Bigwood: "For some things tags only work with large numbers.
>
> ... The personal ones do not require the large numbers, social uses
> do."
>
> I completely agree. I frequently make that point myself--that a tag is
> instatly useful to the tagger--in other contexts. I'm sorry I didn't
> specify I was talking about non-personal use.
>
> One caveat: If you don't have large numbers, the personal stuff can
> junk up global displays for others. For example, the global tag cloud
> on PennTags has a very large tag for
> "pfdoctype_newspapers_articles_&_reviews"—all added by one guy. Large
> numbers help the strictly personal fade into the background a bit.
> LibraryThing also does it by considering both a tags raw use-count and
> its *user-count*.
>
>> Large numbers.
>
>
> If you ask me the answer is two things. The first is aggregating tags
> across institutions--a project LibraryThing will be offering soon. The
> second is using the big pool that already exists: LibraryThing. Put
> LibraryThing's tags into a catalog as a starter set, and you'd get
> some interesting new ways to browse your collection. That's our
> thinking anyway.
>
>> Social tagging:
>
>
> This is a big and interesting topic. Here's $.02.
>
> There's a balance between selfish and altruistic, and some gradients
> in between, like when a member of a church tags things for the benefit
> of a small group. There is also, if not an incentive to tag
> altruistically, something of a desire not to appear a fool. I see this
> on LT all the time. Everyone's tags are public, so people are
> conscious to note that that Ann Coulter book was a gift. Or, take my
> brother (please!), who tags his small collection of semi-erotica
> "sex!" Wink wink nudge nudge.
>
> But the larger part on all the mentioned services (LT, Delicious,
> Flickr) is personal.
>
>> Karen Coyle: "Then I look at something like WorldCat, and it recently
>
> allowing users to add reviews. I don't feel motivated to add reviews
> because my single review would be just a drop in the bucket, since
> most of the items don't have a review, and many of the items in the
> database are of little interest and will NEVER have a review. There
> isn't a critical mass of reviews to stimulate me to take part. The
> database is just too big and my effort would be lost. This may be how
> users feel about tagging in Amazon."
>
> I think you're dead right. Not to go too far afield but here are some
> other quick throughts on why WorldCat's reviews have never gone
> anywhere:
>
> 1. They aren't posted right away; there is an approval process.
> 2. WorldCat gives detailed directions on how to write your review.
> It's patronizing and a turn-off to most visitors. Amazon doesn't do
> that; it just sorts by how many people like a review. LibraryThing
> even allows people to even post URLs. There is a deep lesson here
> about the differences between how library science traditonally thinks
> and how search engines and much other new media does: Filter on the
> way out, not on the way in.
> 3. WorldCat doesn't put the reviews—or even a review count—on the main
> page for a book. You need to click a tab and—whoops, another reviews
> tab with no content! They should get away from the tabs, put a sample
> on the front page or at least label the tab like "Reviews (2)."
> 4. LibraryThing is advantaged by the fact that the books you enter are
> mostly ones you've read, so you're "ready" to review it. Both WorldCat
> and Amazon suffer from the fact that you go there primary to find new
> stuff, not to piddle-paddle over records for stuff you've already
> ready. But Amazon overcomes this by remembering and linking to what
> you bought and browsed (so you can easily go back and review
> something), and by encouraging browsing all over the site. Often, a
> recommended link will be to something you've read—and you may decide
> to review it.
> 5. WorldCat feels antiseptic and empty. There could be a million
> people there every day and it would still feel this way—like that
> scene in 28 Days Later where the streets of London are empty. Amazon
> and LibraryThing are constantly reminding you that you are not alone.
> Every page is part of a larger social whole.
>
>> Allen Mullen: "Dare to compare - that's what I say. Populate a
>
> library catalog with tags and/or provide social tagging capabilities
> to the patrons, then give them the choice between using these
> capabilities or using our conventional search capabilities. Then
> collect and analyze data, compare and contrast, etc."
>
> Amen. I'd like to see them appearing on the same page, but not intermixed.
--
Emily Lynema
Systems Librarian for Digital Projects
Information Technology, NCSU Libraries
919-513-8031
emily_lynema_at_ncsu.edu
Received on Fri Feb 23 2007 - 12:27:23 EST