Huh. Well, then. :)
On what basis do you think mobile devices will go away? Do you mean
like some apocalyptic event and the end of modern times as we know it?
Alex
On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Peter Schlumpf <pschlumpf_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> The way I see things going is the total dissociation of data and semantics
> with the medium and whatever technology used to store present it, whether
> it's paper cards or iPads. There will come a time, sooner than one may
> think, when mobile devices will be gone. Even the "cloud" will come and
> go. It doesn't matter. Then there may come a day once again when in some
> cases a paper card catalogue might be a desired "format" for this kind of
> stuff.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Alexander Johannesen <
> alexander.johannesen_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Smaller displays can only handle so much, just as people can only handle
>> so much. How can the library catalog adapt to that?
>>
>> I think it is a bit deeper than that. A lot of development also
>> happens in other fields, like the before-mentioned semantic
>> technologies, but also user experience, HCI, norms for GUIs, norms for
>> information architecture, and the focus on APIs in software in
>> general. And we humans are catching up to adapting our systems to the
>> way we humans deal with the world, ie. human cognition.
>>
>> First it was about presenting byte-sized info (ala Twitter and
>> widget-driven systems), and then little by little our systems have
>> caught up to the human notion of information constraints and
>> boundaries; constraints often negates how data is interpreted, and
>> boundaries determines the context of the data. Coupled with human
>> cognition, these are exciting times for reshaping information not for
>> smaller screens, but for human beings in general. Even larger and far
>> more complex systems are going this way of widgetifying complexity
>> down to a level of quicker understanding patterns and semantics of
>> data; smaller units of data explained by relationships between other
>> smaller units of data.
>>
>> We are heading for systems that have models closer to the human model
>> of understanding. Oh, did I mention Topic Maps? *grin*
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 5, 2013 at 12:56 AM, James Weinheimer
>> <weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 10/4/2013 3:04 PM, Richard Wallis wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> >> "Individual pieces of content aggregated together into one experience."
>> >> Isn't that linked data?
>> >>
>> >> No, but UI components such as cards that create the experience can be
>> >> built
>> >> and connected easier/better if the data underpinning them is linked.
>> >
>> > </snip>
>> >
>> > As it says in the article, because of the huge growth in APIs and SDKs
>> (that
>> > is, individual applications working behind the scenes to give a
>> specialized
>> > kind of access and retrieval and do not have to have anything to do with
>> > linked data) "is driving the web away from many pages of content linked
>> > together... " into what the author claims will be a type of a card
>> display.
>> > This is because mobile will probably be the main wave of the future, so
>> > while there is such a great deal of information that *can* be aggregated
>> > together, there is a corresponding loss of screen size, therefore:
>> something
>> > has to give. Even the latest Google update, Google Hummingbird, which
>> they
>> > claim is like replacing the engine on a car:
>> > "Panda, Penguin and other updates were changes to parts of the old
>> > algorithm, but not an entire replacement of the whole. Think of it again
>> > like an engine. Those things were as if the engine received a new oil
>> filter
>> > or had an improved pump put in. Hummingbird is a brand new engine,
>> though it
>> > continues to use some of the same parts of the old, like Penguin and
>> Panda."
>> > Google claims they changed it to improve something they call
>> "Conversational
>> > Search". Search Engine Land has a good review of Hummingbird.
>> > http://searchengineland.com/google-hummingbird-172816
>> >
>> > Conversational search is natural language, uses semantic technologies and
>> > who knows what else but it is obvious that conversational search
>> envisions
>> > people interoperating with their mobiles by voice. Google Glass works
>> only
>> > by voice so conversational search has to work for it. I must acknowledge
>> > that when I try to use the touchpad on my android phone, all I do is type
>> > mistakes. It is much easier to use the voice input, even though it makes
>> me
>> > feel like Captain Kirk ordering Scotty to beam me up.
>> >
>> > I don't care for the idea of "cards" given in that article in "Inside
>> > Intercom" but the logic seems to be inescapable. Smaller displays can
>> only
>> > handle so much, just as people can only handle so much. How can the
>> library
>> > catalog adapt to that?
>> >
>> > Will the Next Generation Catalog for Libraries actually be a return to
>> the
>> > cards? That would just be too ironic!
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > James Weinheimer weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com
>> > First Thus http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
>> > First Thus Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/FirstThus
>> > Cooperative Cataloging Rules
>> > http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
>> > Cataloging Matters Podcasts
>> > http://blog.jweinheimer.net/p/cataloging-matters-podcasts.html
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
>> --- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
>> ------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
>>
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/ ----------------------------------------------
------------------ http://www.google.com/profiles/alexander.johannesen ---
Received on Fri Oct 04 2013 - 23:53:41 EDT