NCSU Libraries’ initial implementation of its Endeca-powered catalog did little to utilize increased flexibility to create more interoperability.
This talk would discuss current work to enable integration by creating a web services platform on top of the catalog. Examples include a web service supplying local availability for ISBN REST requests, an RSS layer for all catalog search/browse activities, and OpenSearch integration with the library website’s Quick Search (including experimentation with facet data in OpenSearch).
Over the past 1/2 year, Oregon State University (OSU) Libraries have been actively developing a hybrid federated search service called LibraryFind. We believe that our approach is unique in a number of ways (knowledge-base management, caching, OpenURL integration). OSU believes LibraryFind has something to contribute to the library community, and I’d like to show attendees what LibraryFind is, some things we learned through usability studies and how they can get the software and start playing.
In August, Georgia Tech launched 'the Ümlaut', an OpenURL middleware layer intended to bridge the gap between vendor supplied databases, our SFX link resolver, our catalog and freely available gray literature. There were many breakdowns with our link resolver, most notably with conference proceedings, that merely left users frustrated. Librarians pointed at the vendors' crappy data, vendors blamed the librarians, but this did nothing to help the users.
By indexing the opac data a little differently, utilizing the search engine APIs, OAI-PMH providers and various other web services, we were able to enhance the functionality of our link resolver to eliminate majority of our most problematic use cases. When new issues arise, it is trivial to add new logic to handle them.
This presentation will use the Ümlaut as an example of bringing together simple, easily accessible tools into one framework and will open dialog on how these methods can open other bottlenecks in our traditional workflows.
Various (discrete and disparate) library systems have experimented with incorporating community-contributed content. Yet, as we are seeing, few systems, if any can gather a sufficient volume of contributed data to achieve critical mass and have a meaningfully presence in the OPAC.
However, if this content was aggregated across jurisdictions (using a small footprint web-service model and centralized database), libraries could play a central role in the evolution of "social search" on the web. Specifically, if libraries put more emphasis on gathering structured data from patrons, this data could be integrated not only into the display of bibliographic records, but into the algorithms which guide the patron's searches and discovery processes. This includes natural language thesauri that link user tags to library classifications, user ratings factored into relevancy rankings, user-generated "bibliographies" (Pick Lists) linked to search terms, and the filtering of results by trusted groups of users - as selected by the Patron.
This session will describe the work that BiblioCommons has been undertaking to explore implementation models for Social Discovery Systems in library environments, with seed funding form three Canadian Provinces.
At PINES we have the luxury of a very supportive administrative team. Through trial and error over the last three years we have had the chance to glean a set of do's and don'ts for the building of a successful in-house development team and environment. We would like to share our experience in the hope that others may be able to duplicate our successes and avoid our missteps at all levels, from developers on up to management.
Many cat pictures (and the presentation content) is now available in PDF and OpenDocument formats.
What if we could share our libraries like we can share music in iTunes? Maybe we can. Maybe a little ZeroConf and OpenSearch added to existing library systems like metasearch and service resolvers can help make it happen faster, easier, and cheaper than you might think. Or two of those, at least.
[Update, post-conference] the slides and audio from the talk are available here.
The man behind the camera apologizes as video was accidentally not taken of this talk (he was watching Dan instead.) He has since combined the audio and slides and uploaded it to archive.org:
We are now accepting proposals for prepared talks for Code4lib 2007.
Code4lib 2007 is a loosely structured conference for library
technologists to commune, gather/create/share ideas and software, be
inspired, and forge collaborations. It is also an outgrowth of the
Access HackFest, wrapped into a conference-ish format. It is *the* event
for technologists building digital libraries and digital information
systems, tools, and software. Code4lib 2007 will be held from February
28 through March 2 in Athens, Georgia.
Prepared Talk Information
Prepared talks are 20 minutes, and must center on "tools" (some cool new
software, software library or integration platform), "specs" (how to get
the most out of some protocols, or proposals for new ones), or
"challenges" (One or more big problems we should collectively address).
We will evaluate proposals on criteria of usefulness, newness,
geekiness, and diversity of topics.
Prepared talk proposals of 75 words or less are being accepted for
review now. Please send your name, email address, and proposal to: email@example.com.
We cannot accept every prepared talk proposal, but multiple lightning
talk sessions will provide everyone who wishes to present with ample
opportunity to show off. Lightning talks are 5-minute presentations that
any conference attendee can sign up to present.
The proposal deadline is November 30, 2006, and proposers will be
notified by December 15, 2006. Voting on the proposals will be public,
and held in a similar fashion to SXSW.
There have been some posts in the blogosphere about things participants did not enjoy about the previous year's Code4Lib conference. Since planning has started for the 2007 conference, I thought now would be a good time to open the doors and ask what should be improved about the conference. What should be done the same and what should be done differently? Here is a place to start gathering voices...
A lightning talk is a fast paced 5 minute talk on the topic of your choosing. If you'd like to do a lightning talk please add your name, topic to this page. You can do more than one if you want, but if the lots fill up (there are 30 of them) you might have to choose which one you want to do.
Mark Jason Dominus has a nice page about lightning talks, which includes this summary of why you might want to do one:
Maybe you've never given a talk before, and you'd like to start small. For a Lightning Talk, you don't need to make slides, and if you do decide to make slides, you only need to make three.
Maybe you're nervous and you're afraid you'll mess up. It's a lot easier to plan and deliver a five minute talk than it is to deliver a long talk. And if you do mess up, at least the painful part will be over quickly.
Maybe you don't have much to say. Maybe you just want to ask a question, or invite people to help you with your project, or boast about something you did, or tell a short cautionary story. These things are all interesting and worth talking about, but there might not be enough to say about them to fill up thirty minutes.
Maybe you have a lot of things to say, and you're already going to give a long talk on one of them, and you don't want to hog the spotlight. There's nothing wrong with giving several Lightning Talks. Hey, they're only five minutes.