> I'm not saying that libraries are superfluous...I'm a big library supporter. I guess I'm saying that library
> catalogs have failed to evolve much over the years. Online catalogs were first developed back when libraries
> were still pretty much the only game in town (or on campus) when it came to information access. And library
> catalogs still seem to reflect that "only game in town" mentality, in an age where many alternatives exist.
One reason this has happened is that the rest of the web is based on
an essentially open model. Most of the content is available for
indexing and linking, and no central institution controls the
metadata. This openness has produced *waves* of innovation and
improvement—the web today is vastly more interesting and better
organized than it was a decade ago. This while library information
systems are stuck about where they were when the web took off.
It is therefore all the more concerning that, as the realization dawns
on all that libraries have missed the boat, and people are bypassing
them in favor of the web, the Guardians of Libraryland are calling for
a decisive turn away from openness—from the very thing that made the
web work.
Sincerely,
Tim
*In effect, Google commands the metadata now, but that was only
possible because there was no central control. Without that, we'd all
be using WebCrawler or Veronica or etc. And if something better came
along, they would no doubt lose their position.
Received on Thu Feb 12 2009 - 20:57:48 EST