Pot 3.0 -- The Semantic Pot

< CSSVista Updated | Random Youtube Video >

May 1

Pot 3.0 -- The Semantic Pot

Work 4 Comments »

In a posting to a mailing list I've recently joined (Web4lib), Tim Spalding of LibraryThing fame hopped in to a discussion on Web 2.0 and what it means to libraries...and how libraries are abusing these technologies. Either way, the silly yet factual statement he makes breaks up the conversation quite well:

I don't think Web 2.0 is a fad, but it's clear the *term* has jumped
the shark when the media starts talking about powerful marijuana as
"Pot 2.0":

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18310976/

Of course, everything will change when we have Pot 3.0, the Semantic Pot.

In the overall discussion, technology focused professionals in the library genre are trying to dispell the overly magical powers that our "Web 2.0" applications can grant us mere mortals. Libraries are springing up with blogs, wikis, and RSS feeds simply to use them, but not really thinking over how it will benefit the user -- something that many sites are guilty of (ours is beyond behind the times, so I'm not guilty of that, just many other things -- new site is in the works, finally).

Posted by Brendon Kozlowski

0 Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

4 Comments

Display comments as(Linear | Threaded)

Mike says:
05/02/2007 09:20:24 AM
Abusing? I'm not on that list and I think Tim is a smart guy but personally I can't say I've seen anything I would refer to as "abusing". As I've said elsewhere, I really think you have to throw a bunch of this stuff at the wall and see what sticks and what slides down. OTOH, any library that thinks web 2.0 technologies are automatic salvation for their sinking ships are out to lunch...
Brendon Kozlowski says:
05/02/2007 10:38:48 AM
Perhaps "abusing" was too harsh of a word. There are quite a few staff members who have wonderful ideas here, but they also mix up their strive for technological innovation to salvage the public's interests. Although it may help (and as you say, sometimes it's best to find out through trial and error), the fact that thought isn't put in to how these tools could benefit our patrons rather than the fact that the staff simply want to use it because they've heard so many "amazing" things about the tools...

Well, it gets kind of messy; and half of the projects that are started, are not kept up with. It's disappointing. The list itself was buzzing quite a bit though, and I feel that it's a pretty decent discussion. There's a lot of reading to go through, but you might want to take a read through it to get a better perception of what was being discussed (I probably did a poor job of explaining it -- honestly, I just found Tim's break in the flow of comment to be a breath of fresh air).

Web4lib Archives -- the title of the thread (near the bottom) began as "Skills for Library 2.0 Leaders". I'd link you directly to it, but the thread flow was broken.
Mike says:
05/02/2007 11:13:43 AM
I did look at the archives. Obviously, tech for tech's sake is silly but anything that has the possibility to give value to at least some patrons is worth trying IMHO...
Brendon Kozlowski says:
05/02/2007 03:39:35 PM
I can definitely agree with that, as long as it's not a "fad" feature. I want to make sure that our staff are prepared to keep up with these things. I fill in where I can and what I can, but there are certain things where my knowledge and interests do not take me (such as suggested reading, I really only read tech books and cookbooks).

But yes, if there's a chance for any beneficial feedback, then it's at least worth it for that. I am a public servant, afterall.