Re: Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)

I'm hoping that my response hasn't lost context since the OLE portion of 
this thread forked to browses.

The OLE Project does recognize that the library community should take 
responsibility in designing systems to help library users, and thus we 
recognize the DLF ILS-DI efforts for that portion of the overall service 
libraries provide to users.  Projects, like VuFind, Blacklight, XC, 
Jangel, etc., are nobly providing that framework within the data that is 
available.  The difficulties they face are based on the restrictions of 
the data available in the current ILS model.

The OLE Project, on the other hand, is working to transform the data 
model (read: not just descriptive data) so that libraries can prudently 
expose all possible data to interfaces.  Both data management systems 
and discovery interfaces need to be robust and work with each other to 
produce the most effective partnership in managing and discovering data.

Tim

Tim McGeary
Team Leader, Library Technology
Lehigh University
610-758-4998
tim.mcgeary_at_lehigh.edu
Google Talk: timmcgeary
Yahoo IM: timmcgeary

B.G. Sloan wrote:
> Jonathan Rochkind mentions the OLE project (http://oleproject.org).
> 
> I'm encouraged by OLE's stated goal:
> 
> "The goal is to produce a design document to inform open source
> library system development efforts, to guide future library system
> implementations, and to influence current Integrated Library System
> vendor products."
> 
> But I get a little nervous when I read that specifying a design for a
> public user interface is not within the scope of the project.
> 
> The "project scope" web page says: "The OLE framework supports user
> and administrative interfaces of various types." Section 4 of this
> web page lists "Basic ILS Functions". They are all "back room"
> functions.
> 
> I think it's maybe a little dangerous to design "back room" functions
> in isolation, assuming they will support some unspecified "user
> interfaces of various types".
> 
> I think it's really great the OLE folks want to improve "back room"
> systems design, and the open architecture may well will be a boon to
> those designing user interfaces. But I once again worry that it's a
> case of library systems being designed BY librarians FOR librarians.
> 
> Shouldn't the library community take at least some responsibility for
> designing systems to help library users?
> 
> Bernie Sloan Sora Associates Bloomington, IN
> 
> --- On Mon, 3/9/09, Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_JHU.EDU> wrote:
> 
>> From: Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_JHU.EDU> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB]
>> Whose elephant is it, anyway? : was : Three years of NGC4LIB -
>> reflections? -- LONG To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU Date: Monday,
>> March 9, 2009, 10:54 AM Diane I. Hillmann wrote:
>>> It'd be great if we could articulate better what
>> the backroom will need
>>> in the "new" library, because until we do
>> that, it's hard to figure out
>>> how the transition can happen.
>>> 
>> Which of course is the goal of the OLE project, which is why it's
>> good that the OLE project is doing what they're doing. It's not an
>> easy task, I'm glad someone is tackling it.
>> 
>> Jonathan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>