Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Muddiest Point
I believe the article by Clifford A. Lynch was probably the weakest piece of material. What led me to state this opinion is the fact that when I compare it to the other two, it seems rather wordy. The first two articles from “D-Lib” seem a lot more straight-forward in terms of trying to understand what the topic of this week is all about. Because the information from the third article did not appear to demonstrate that sort of brevity, I had a bit more difficulty absorbing the core aspects. Of course, I am not claiming the article was bad, let alone useless. It was still informative and I managed to figure out how it was related to the other readings. All I am saying is that if the first two articles were to provide information in a rather straight-forward manner, then it would seem logical that the third one should be presented in a similar way. Other than that one particular issue, I did not really have that much trouble observing the content from any of the readings.
DiLight System/NYPL DL
The websites we were given have clearly demonstrated how the search for items within libraries have been simplified. Whereas the organization of finding aids in their physical copies can be a much more tedious process, the digital copies prove to be a lot more efficient. Through the efficient use of the digital finding aids, the searches have shown that the libraries have sources of information in all kinds of different formats, ranging from books, to audios, to DVDs. What enables this sort of solid, yet flexible, structure is the database within the computer system. The database keeps track of all the records that indicate what items are properties of the library. The records provide all the information regarding the item that it represents. Since the information also includes where the actual items are located, the records can also function as finding aids. Of course, that is under the assumption the represented items happen to be in their proper places.
Week 10: Digital Library, Institutional Repositories
Because the introduction of digitization, as well as wider use of the Internet, changed the way sources of information can be formatted and organized, it was only a matter of time that libraries, a haven for sources of information, had to adapt to these technological breakthroughs. However, in order for the incorporation to work, the current staff within the libraries simply could not implement the tasks alone, especially with their increasingly out-dated methods. The situation called upon computer scientists and their field of knowledge to collaborate with the librarians. As a result of the cooperation, the transition became a success, which in turn established and made use of the digital library. As the digital library became well-recognized along with the increasing popularity of the Internet, more libraries had to keep up with the times by adapting to these technologies. By maintaining a collection of sources in their digital format and making use of the Internet as a means to keep them available, libraries were able to continue satisfying the needs of the general public, who are readily engaging in different methods to obtain information. Yet the libraries alone should not be burdened with the task of making digital/digitized sources available to the general public. The universities also contain a treasury for sources of information within their archives. Because the academic system also needs to keep up with the times as much as the public library system, it would seem logical that those institutions also make use of digitization and the Internet. Through the use of their institutional repositories, the items being kept within can be digitized and published over the World Wide Web. As more institutions devoted to collecting, organizing, and maintaining sources of information obtain and incorporate digitization and the Internet (as well as the other latest technological breakthroughs and trends), so long as the people remain engaged with their gadgets, information can become more and more available and much easier to access for the general public.
As noted by Christine L. Borgman in her book “Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet,” the notion of a “digital library” had been dismissed at first. According to the skeptics, the concepts of the library and digitization were incompatible, i.e. “if a library is a library, it is not digital; if a library is digital, it is not a library.” As the times were passing by, science has once again proved the skeptics wrong. Modern-day technology has clearly demonstrated that the format of the library did not have to remain in the confines of what has traditionally been defined as such. As long as an entity is taking on the responsibility of collecting, organizing, and maintaining different sources of information (conventionally from various fields), it can still be considered by a technicality as a library, whether it is in a physical or digital format. The flexibility of this concept should also apply to the archival and academic communities, on account that the items consisting of their collections can also exist in their physical and digital formats. Because universities often maintain libraries and archives within their institutions, through the incorporation of digitization and the Internet, the circumstances render them as the most benevolent of contributors to the general public. However, their generosity does not have to stop there, or at least not within those specific areas. Since universities also preserve the researches of the scholars who had contributed to their institutions, the utilization of the technologies also enables them to quickly publish their works and make the materials readily available via the Internet; thus allowing even more sources of information to become accessible to the general public.
As noted by Christine L. Borgman in her book “Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet,” the notion of a “digital library” had been dismissed at first. According to the skeptics, the concepts of the library and digitization were incompatible, i.e. “if a library is a library, it is not digital; if a library is digital, it is not a library.” As the times were passing by, science has once again proved the skeptics wrong. Modern-day technology has clearly demonstrated that the format of the library did not have to remain in the confines of what has traditionally been defined as such. As long as an entity is taking on the responsibility of collecting, organizing, and maintaining different sources of information (conventionally from various fields), it can still be considered by a technicality as a library, whether it is in a physical or digital format. The flexibility of this concept should also apply to the archival and academic communities, on account that the items consisting of their collections can also exist in their physical and digital formats. Because universities often maintain libraries and archives within their institutions, through the incorporation of digitization and the Internet, the circumstances render them as the most benevolent of contributors to the general public. However, their generosity does not have to stop there, or at least not within those specific areas. Since universities also preserve the researches of the scholars who had contributed to their institutions, the utilization of the technologies also enables them to quickly publish their works and make the materials readily available via the Internet; thus allowing even more sources of information to become accessible to the general public.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Week 11: Web Search and OAI Protocol
Because people have the means to create their own websites, just about anyone can publish their material over the Internet. As more people are obtaining the ability to do so, sources of information can easily get lost in the shuffle. That is why there are search engines to help establish order. The device utilizes an algorithm that calculates how often a website is associated with key words, which is based upon the amount of visitors it receives. As a result, the most popular websites in every category end up reaching at the top of the list when the search begins. However, just because a website happens to be more popular, it does not necessarily mean the content would be accurate. This was when Metadata had been introduced, so that the websites can be harvested in a more meticulous manner; thus concentrating more on the quality of the content, rather than the quantity of the visitors. However, the approach is bound to be met with disagreement, or even hostility, on account that it could encourage some form of elitism. Technically speaking, Metadata is capable of providing for a select few the power to determine which websites should be rendered as superior to others, while the opinions of many are being ignored. With or without the Metadata, the search results being presented ultimately scratches the surface at most. This is why there was a need for another technology that looks much deeper within the content of the website, providing greater accuracy and efficiency from the search results. The use of the Deep Web achieves this goal through a compromise of the core attributes between the popular approach of the former and the selective approach of the latter.
Regardless as to what technology will become available, what will frequently become the case is that a minority ends up overpowering the majority. The only significant difference is whether the shared opinion of a populace or an agreed-upon decision by the elite becomes the determining factor. Whichever might prevail gets to choose their minority that is to overshadow the majority. There are always possibilities that tensions could arise between the two sides, but not all the time. Sometimes the popular choice and the right choice can in fact be one and the same, and it is instances of these mutual agreements and understandings that Michael K. Bergman’s proposition attempts to exploit. Even if only the most genuine of all websites manage to successfully become the minority, the situation becomes increasingly difficult for the majority. Although there is the relief of knowing that websites providing nothing but junk are more likely to be thrown deeper into the depths, websites of better quality are still going to potentially be ignored. A website can provide information just as professionally as any scholarly source could, but there is still no guarantee if it will achieve higher recognition. One factor that the latest innovation explained by Bergman would ignore, which might also apply to future successors, is human nature. So long as people want quick results and can get bored easily, whatever it is that any individual chooses to look into, chances are that the person will only glance at the top ten results at most and will only bother looking thoroughly through one of them (if at all). Unless a website has made an impact on the populace and the elite, it would be lucky to reach even the top twenty.
Regardless as to what technology will become available, what will frequently become the case is that a minority ends up overpowering the majority. The only significant difference is whether the shared opinion of a populace or an agreed-upon decision by the elite becomes the determining factor. Whichever might prevail gets to choose their minority that is to overshadow the majority. There are always possibilities that tensions could arise between the two sides, but not all the time. Sometimes the popular choice and the right choice can in fact be one and the same, and it is instances of these mutual agreements and understandings that Michael K. Bergman’s proposition attempts to exploit. Even if only the most genuine of all websites manage to successfully become the minority, the situation becomes increasingly difficult for the majority. Although there is the relief of knowing that websites providing nothing but junk are more likely to be thrown deeper into the depths, websites of better quality are still going to potentially be ignored. A website can provide information just as professionally as any scholarly source could, but there is still no guarantee if it will achieve higher recognition. One factor that the latest innovation explained by Bergman would ignore, which might also apply to future successors, is human nature. So long as people want quick results and can get bored easily, whatever it is that any individual chooses to look into, chances are that the person will only glance at the top ten results at most and will only bother looking thoroughly through one of them (if at all). Unless a website has made an impact on the populace and the elite, it would be lucky to reach even the top twenty.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)