Web 2.0 Awards

I took a look at Propsmart, which is a real estate hunting website. At first glance it doesn't look much different than some of the other sites I've looked at, except for the commenting possibilities, which I didn't have time to closely explore.

If I can add comments to properties that I've actually taken the time to look at in the real world, I could save time for other house hunters. If this works like Trip Advisor, it could be really great.

I also found some properties that our agent and other websites had not turned up. Alternatively, possible properties that were found elsewhere online were not listed here.

The lesson here is to use many sources when looking to purchase a home.

Catch Up Weeks are Dangerous

I was all caught up, so I created a few avatars and had a couple of laughs with my colleauges. But I also got lazy, and now I'm a few weeks behind.

I also forgot to post for this week. So here it is.

Documents To Share!

From the point of view of our patrons and general usability, this is the best tool to have come across so far.

I've been reading about free online applications for some time, but have not tried them, so I'm glad that they are included in our learning process.

I tried both Google and Zoho, and was happy with both. I didn't really spend too much time on either, as my free time is limited.

The pros are numerous. Most powerful to me and my work are the collaboration possibilities and multiple format access.

I've always been a fan of open source software.

Web 2.0 Commentary

I've just completed reading three articles that were found on the kcls27things blog. Before getting to the articles, I want to mention that I disagree with part of Sarah Houghton's definition of what web 2.0 means with regard to libraries. First of all, she does not simply supply a definition of web 2.0. Rather, she supplies the reader with a short definition and then adds editorial comment. She opines, "The basic drive is to get people back into the library by making the library relevant to what they want and need in their daily lives…to make the library a destination and not an afterthought."

This seems to be circular reasoning. Based on the quote above, libraries are relevant when they give patrons what they want and need in their day to day lives. How can a library possibly remain relevant by trying to accomplish such a huge goal? It also does not define which wants and needs are relevant to libraries. So hence the tautology that she seems to imply: Libraries are relevant by being relevant. What makes a library relevant is so much more complicated and delicate than she implies. She also seems to be stating that at this point in time, libraries are not giving patrons what they want and need, because they are not fully grasping web 2.0 tools, and if they were to do that, poof! patrons would have what they want.

I want to clarify that my understanding of public libraries is that they first develop a vision statement, goals and then objectives. They provide programs and services based on that vision statement. They don't simply give patrons what they want because they clamour for it. That would be a definition of a big box store. Public Libraries are not stores. They have limited budgets and need to necessarily limit what they do based on budgets, priorities and visions. Libraries are relevant because they do what they do better than any other agency, not because they give patrons everything they want and need, whatever that might be. An important point to consider and to remember is that public libraries are not businesses, they are government agencies that necessarily need to provide access to all who reside in a given community. Important questions to consider are, whose wants and needs are most important? How does one serve the under served if they don't clearly define their wants and needs? How do you provide for a community with diverse wants and needs when budgets are small? Properly answering those questions can be complicated and requires dedicated professionals to work through solutions to those questions.

If libraries are truly to remain relevant, they need to remember what it is that they have done well traditionally, and enhance that with web 2.0 tools. Collections have never been designed simply based on what patrons want. Yes, the patron's needs are relevant and it's important to survey patrons to ascertain what those needs and wants are that also fit in with a library's vision, but there may also be other outlets to satisfy some of those patron needs, and that's OK. The library will always be relevant if it continues to keep focused on top notch collections, great customer service and most important, facilitated access to credible information.


Web 2.0 tools should never drive visions and goals, rather, web 2.0 tools should be used to help libraries achieve their visions and goals, and this should be done very thoughtfully and carefully.

Rollyo Vs. Google

I've taken a look at both options. The most obvious difference is that Rollyo is very slow. I'm thinking that anyone who is interested in a personalized search engine is probably interested in accessing that information quickly.

Every time I used Rollyo, the results were very slow to come. On the other hand, Google was as fast as ever.

I noticed that results between the two search engines ranked results differently. My search was "author programs". For instance, Rollyo featured Tacoma Public Library highly, whereas the Google Search featured results for Seattle Public Library and Sno-Isle Library.

I don't mind the sponsored adds on Rollyo. It's easy to spot and then ignore them.

You can take a look at my Cycling Puget Sound Rollyo Search Engine

I think the benefit of personalized search engines is to have the information that you need at your fingertips. It helps someone extract specific information from websites, and to keep track of changes. I'm thinking about how this is different from using and rss feeds. They are similar, but having a personalized search engine is more easily shared and ostensibly pinpoints desired information more accurately than an rss feed.

I Want Control!

I completed the two Wiki assignments. Based on my personal experiences and the assigned readings, I think Wiki's have great potential to aggregate useful information that is kept up-to-date in real time. I like the idea of a system-wide Wiki rolodex or a temporary wiki that helps aid in accomplishing a short term or long term project. I see wiki's as information tools that help get a particular job done. When visiting some of the library Wiki's I thought that sought after information might be too embeded for the casual user to find. I also thought that the wiki pages were quite boring. For so long, the online world has been focusingattractive websites that are easy to use. Those wikis that I explored for this assignment seem to be quite rudimentary with regards to design and ease of use. I assume that they will evolve over time and that this criticism will no longer be valid.

I feel less comfortable using Wiki's in libraries within free for all environments such as for patron book comments or general commenting sited. Libraries need to remain controlled environments in order for them to be safe places for everybody. The blogosphere is a pretty wild west kind of crazy place, where people are routinely attacked, tags are used maliciously, and flame wars abound. While I like the idea of tagging and linking, libraries were originally designed as places where information was kept confidential. I don't think cataloged items should have any baggage linked to them. I believe our items should be in the catalog bias free. If folks want opinions expressed from the general population, there are already many sites to visit.

Libraries are necessarily controlled so that we have balanced collections that represent all aspects of society. Each item should stand on it's own.

What Was Old Is New Again

According to an article in the Guardian Unlimited, actual literary magazines are experiencing a comeback. What's the message for libraries? Don't put all of your eggs in the virtual basket. They may break. Read further here.

My Library Thing Link

I realize that I sometimes am not the best at following instructions. I had not posted my Library Thing page. Here it is.