I've just been quickly looking through Issues to be addressed by MyLibrary Adopters, and immediately started wondering what a social version - OurLibrary, if you like - might look like...
(Long suffering readers may remember I did a simpler thought experiment for the OU ROUTES system in the form of Social ROUTES.)
So anyway - here's some of the MyLibrary stuff that looked like it could be sociable (the empasized quotes are all taken form the Issues... document):
"Being a portal sort of application, the content of MyLibrary must be updated frequently or your patrons will cease to use it. You and your staff probably feel your time is already limited. Consequently, you might have to streamline other services, reallocate time and energy, or hire new staff in order to keep MyLibrary running in a manner truly beneficial to your patrons. MyLibrary does not necessarily make your work easier; MyLibrary is a framework for providing Web-based information services in a manner increasingly expected by the typical user of the Internet."
Hmm - seems like you need the users to help out here...
"Developing a collection management policy for MyLibrary is essential. This policy, along with the controlled vocabulary (described in the next section), provide the intellectual framework for the entire service."
Controlled vovablulary...hmmm...ok - if this was a tag based system, you could make recommenadations from the controlled vocabulary. The question arises as to who the controlled voacbulary is supposed to be useful for, of course. If the vocabulary is there to help users locate resources by themselves, perhaps a folksonomy would be more useful?
"The collection management policy articulates the qualities of the information resources you will be including in the system."
Okay - how about if these resources are based on user recommendations, either implicit ones (clips, bookmarks etc.) or explicit ones (user ratings etc.)?
"For better or for worse, the functionality of MyLibrary is predicated on the existence of a flat, controlled vocabulary of subject terms called "disciplines." Everything from the librarians to the information resources to the users of MyLibrary itself are classified with this controlled vocabulary. Without this classification system associations cannot be made between librarians and patrons, patrons and resources, or resources and librarians. The disciplines glue the entire system together."
Okay - if there are any tag evangelists out there, do you want to post a comment or two picking up on any of this? (e.g. here is a debate from the start of this year, and here's an paper on a similar topic).
"Because of limitations in the systems's implementation, the list of disciplines must be flat, not hierarchial."
:-)
"The list must be granular enough to satisfy the classification needs of the resources as well as the interests of the patrons [my emphasis]. At the same time, the list can not be so finely grained that it grows too long to be usable. Try to create a vocabulary that reflects your patrons' needs."
Perhaps by letting the users tag stuff themselves, but give them huge hint conditions by offering up the preferred vocabulary terms? For example, the post to del.icio.us bookmarklet pops up a posting indow that contins the user's own tags, as well as suggested/recommended tags based on other users' classification of the resource being bookmarked.
"It is recommended that you limit your vocabulary to no more than fifty (50) headings. Larger institutions will require larger controlled vocabulary lists."
Sound advice there, perhaps - my taglist on del.icio.us is getting ridiculously long...
"Finally, it is imperative you define your disciplines before you do any data-entry. While it is a trivial process to re-classify sets of items in MyLibrary with other discipline headings, removing disciplines that have been assigned to many items requires a process of retrospective conversion that could be avoided if the disciplines are articulated 'correctly' in the first place. A lot of planning now will save even more time later."
Hmm - I don;t have that problem reclassifying my del.icio.us bookmarks...
"You now need to determine who is going to be providing MyLibrary services. These services include:
It is left as an exercise for the reader to determine who provides the above services in a social bookmarking system like del.icio.us or Connotea (please feel free to pst your answer as a comment). Alternatively, who would be responsible in a Managaed Social Bookmarking Environment?
"The system was designed to be maintained by two sets of people: 1) a webmaster and 2) librarians who specialize in various disciplines...The librarians' responsibilities lie in the maintenance of information resources and the posting of discipline-specific messages. They should be more than familiar with the discipline list. They should be passionate about their disciplines and their profession or their regular performance. Their regular appraisals should include evaluations of MyLibrary implementation. Otherwise there will be little incentive for keeping MyLibrary up-to-date."
!
"The maintenance of MyLibrary relies on trust, frequent communication between librarians, and a sense of good will. Librarians must trust other service providers not to overwrite their work. Librarians must believe other librarians are going to include valid content in the system. Communication has to take place between all librarians so everybody knows what the others are doing. Everybody has to work under the same set of collection management policies and discipline lists. If somebody wants to add an item to the system, then there is nothing stopping them from doing so. This is an empowering feature. Results are immediate. On the other hand, if you create an atmosphere of centrality, then results will be less immediate and librarians may take less pride in their work and feel less in control. Remember, the names of the librarians are listed right there on every MyLibrary page."
Librarians? Not users? Why the distinction? (Bear in mind that the MyLibrary concept predates social bookmarking - but how well would this read if it were recast in the language of social bookmarking/digital resource management? [That was a Lazyweb request, by the way, just in case you didn't notice...])
"The actual maintenance of MyLibrary requires brain work and a willingness to use the system's administrative interface. The brain work relies on the ability of the librarians to identify information resources complying with all the policies outlined in the previous sections. Do the resources fit the collection management policy? Can they be classified with one or more of the discipline headings? If not, then the resource must be excluded from the system or the policies must be revised."
If you have to rewrite the policy every time you find a useful resource not covered by it, why not just dump the policy and TRUST the users (err, that is, librarians...)?
"After information resources are successfully identified, they can be added to the system using the administrative interface. It is a cyclical process involving the completion of simple HTML forms. The process includes:
Phew...rather you than me, Ms Librarian, sir, ma'am...! ;-)
"The most complete analysis will come from the use of sophisticated SQL queries applied against the MyLibrary database. Given the system's "database dictionary" enumerating it's tables and fields, a person familiar with SQL will be able, today, to answer questions such as:
Some useful tips for user reports there, I think, for developers of social bookmarking systems...
"The evaluation/implementation cycle of MyLibrary is unending. Technology changes. Expectations evolve. Roles get modified. Budgets grow and shrink. You know all this. MyLibrary is no exception. Based on your experience, continue with MyLibrary by starting over again with the first step or simply stop using MyLibrary."
Exactly...
Posted by ajh59 at November 21, 2005 10:40 PM