Thursday, May 29, 2008
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Woops... I knew I forgot something
As has been pointed out, I forgot to say in my last post what the Library could add as an RSS feed to its own site (I'll forget my own head next). As Natarsha stated, one of the best areas is that of new additions to the collection. Considering the amount that we receive in a day, it would probably make sense to break them up into a few basic subject areas. Like the news feeds, a couple of hundred new items landing in someone's reader every day will quickly become overwhelming. This should also include not just standard collection material, but original materials as well.
There are a range of items that could be added as feeds. Theoretically it could include everytime there is an update on the site. I think the most useful aspects would be news items such as changes to collection access, exhibitions, events at the library etc. Pretty much anything that is included in the monthly email sent to library users.
Also to be included could be a client-oriented message from the State Librarian, or any senior librarians regarding developments at the Library that would be useful for clients to know. Perhaps research tips from reference librarians, or hints for useful material that's relevant to what has been in the news recently.
There are a range of items that could be added as feeds. Theoretically it could include everytime there is an update on the site. I think the most useful aspects would be news items such as changes to collection access, exhibitions, events at the library etc. Pretty much anything that is included in the monthly email sent to library users.
Also to be included could be a client-oriented message from the State Librarian, or any senior librarians regarding developments at the Library that would be useful for clients to know. Perhaps research tips from reference librarians, or hints for useful material that's relevant to what has been in the news recently.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
RSS induced overdose
I like the idea of RSS. Being a newsjunkie, there a lot of websites that I continuously look at - ABC, SMH, Age, Guardian etc. - to get my fix. I also keep a lot of blogs in my favourites folder to be looked at everyday. Having them fed to one place certainly makes things easier.
For my Library RSS I've picked a selection of items along this line. Powerhouse of course, the world news feed from The Guardian, international and domestic news feeds from the ABC and, for fun, the Science Show with Dr Karl from Triple J. There are piles of others I could have picked, but I'll save those for later.
The obvious use for RSS in libraries and work situations is to use them to monitor journals, news sites, blogs etc. that are relevant to your work. Rather than constantly going back to peruse sites and potentially missing new developments, you can have them sent to you and, in theory, you won't miss anything. The drawback that I can see, and it's minor, is that a reader account can be overloaded with feeds to the point where a person cannot be bothered to trawl through every feed thay are receiving. I've already noticed this with the ABC feeds. They send every little news update, which can be overwhelming to read. You really have to skim through them for what's interesting or relevant., which almost defeats the purpose of having a feed in the first place. Or maybe I just have to be more selective in what I pick. Also you can fall prey to not looking for new sites that are relevant, and just looking at the feeds you are already getting. As I said though, these are minor points.
For libraries in particular, I would say that they could be used to monitor not just library specific developments, but also to monitor publisher and historian websites for anything that might be useful. Also, any sites or blogs of library users. They're our clients after all and we should be paying attention to what they are saying. How else do we improve?
For my Library RSS I've picked a selection of items along this line. Powerhouse of course, the world news feed from The Guardian, international and domestic news feeds from the ABC and, for fun, the Science Show with Dr Karl from Triple J. There are piles of others I could have picked, but I'll save those for later.
The obvious use for RSS in libraries and work situations is to use them to monitor journals, news sites, blogs etc. that are relevant to your work. Rather than constantly going back to peruse sites and potentially missing new developments, you can have them sent to you and, in theory, you won't miss anything. The drawback that I can see, and it's minor, is that a reader account can be overloaded with feeds to the point where a person cannot be bothered to trawl through every feed thay are receiving. I've already noticed this with the ABC feeds. They send every little news update, which can be overwhelming to read. You really have to skim through them for what's interesting or relevant., which almost defeats the purpose of having a feed in the first place. Or maybe I just have to be more selective in what I pick. Also you can fall prey to not looking for new sites that are relevant, and just looking at the feeds you are already getting. As I said though, these are minor points.
For libraries in particular, I would say that they could be used to monitor not just library specific developments, but also to monitor publisher and historian websites for anything that might be useful. Also, any sites or blogs of library users. They're our clients after all and we should be paying attention to what they are saying. How else do we improve?
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Wikirant
Ok, this is the point where I have to admit that 2.0 has to be applied selectively. I like the idea of wikis, but the concept has major flaws.
For something like Wookieepedia a wiki is great. It's allows for the vast spread of knowledge concerning an aspect of popular culture to be accumulated and accessed. Much of the info that's given is not readily available from one source, and a wiki allows for it to be gathered together. I can also see the use of a wiki for a collaborative project within a workplace, as long as the changes, and who made them, can be tracked.
Wookieepedia, however, is an unofficial site that carries very little real authoratitive weight. If someone garners inaccurate information from it then the potential for harm is very minimal. The same cannot be said for sites that convey official information and are considered to be authoratitive, such as libraries. Wikis, when applied to library sites, need to be applied selectively and only to those parts of a library's site that convey subjective information, such as book reviews. Even then it must be made clear that the information presented is part of a wiki.
Although wikis are useful, the potential for abuse is extremely high if they are not monitored carefully. Yes studies have been conducted on the accuracy of Wikipedia, but that is a site which can afford to conduct rigorous monitoring of its information. It does not account for the wikis that do not conduct such monitoring.
If it is monitored carefully, then wikis could be used very well for reviewing library material and their usefulness. They could also be used for subject guides and bibliographies used by the clients. A client is very likely to find material, not otherwise mentioned, that's useful for a particular topic.
I suppose my point is that wikis are great if they're carefully monitored and applied. If that's done then they would be great in letting clients feel as if they are involved in the library. Here endeth the rant.
For something like Wookieepedia a wiki is great. It's allows for the vast spread of knowledge concerning an aspect of popular culture to be accumulated and accessed. Much of the info that's given is not readily available from one source, and a wiki allows for it to be gathered together. I can also see the use of a wiki for a collaborative project within a workplace, as long as the changes, and who made them, can be tracked.
Wookieepedia, however, is an unofficial site that carries very little real authoratitive weight. If someone garners inaccurate information from it then the potential for harm is very minimal. The same cannot be said for sites that convey official information and are considered to be authoratitive, such as libraries. Wikis, when applied to library sites, need to be applied selectively and only to those parts of a library's site that convey subjective information, such as book reviews. Even then it must be made clear that the information presented is part of a wiki.
Although wikis are useful, the potential for abuse is extremely high if they are not monitored carefully. Yes studies have been conducted on the accuracy of Wikipedia, but that is a site which can afford to conduct rigorous monitoring of its information. It does not account for the wikis that do not conduct such monitoring.
If it is monitored carefully, then wikis could be used very well for reviewing library material and their usefulness. They could also be used for subject guides and bibliographies used by the clients. A client is very likely to find material, not otherwise mentioned, that's useful for a particular topic.
I suppose my point is that wikis are great if they're carefully monitored and applied. If that's done then they would be great in letting clients feel as if they are involved in the library. Here endeth the rant.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Optimus or Optimi
This image sums up teamwork pretty well. http://www.flickr.com/photos/revlimit/635768954/
Plus it appeals to my great love of 80s cartoons. Now I just need to find one of Thundercats.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Flickring through the library
The Flickr images of SLNSW seem to consist of a few different types. There are all the usual grand photos of the external facade of the building itself. But to me the more interesting photos are the shots that depict either the small, oft forgotten, details of the building, such as the frieze along the Mitchell building. Also there are the photos of how people actually use the building, whether it is the people having coffee on the steps, those within the Reading Rooms or the lady taking photos within Mitchell. This is what's missing from the photos of the Mitchell entrance. Very few of them actually show people entering the library!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)