tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11668983.post111502073442477646..comments2023-09-19T09:28:19.313-05:00Comments on Librarians at the Gate: Reinventing the wheelBarbarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10689314012050314027noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11668983.post-1115139029678489582005-05-03T11:50:00.000-05:002005-05-03T11:50:00.000-05:00Brad, as I mentioned, this idea isn't new. Lancast...Brad, as I mentioned, this idea isn't new. Lancaster cited, for example, Brown et al. (1996), who proposed user indexing nearly a decade ago.<BR/><BR/>AlecAlechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04503895513959778422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11668983.post-1115138486576871712005-05-03T11:41:00.000-05:002005-05-03T11:41:00.000-05:00Yes, I remember Lancaster's "oh, hang a moment..."...Yes, I remember Lancaster's "oh, hang a moment..." article. Another interesting take on this whole issue is the book The Myth of the Paperless Office by Abigail J. Sellen and Richard H. R. Harper (MIT, 2001) - has some very interesting things to say about paper (and about Melville Dewey, by the way...) <BR/><BR/>As for what Brad said about disrupting librarians' authority - since we have no authority over things that we don't put into our catalogs (e.g. our subscription indexes, much less the Web) is it a big deal to disrupt it? I'm not being snarky here - just curious. Is the idea that a person can improve the findability of things threatening to librarians? I don't think so. It's just ... well, yes, actually, we had thought of that...<BR/><BR/>Now, whether we've adequately found ways of doing it well is another matter. Our catalogs are not easy for students to use, especially when they don't know what they are looking for. Which Umberto Eco says is the purpose of a library - to help you find things you don't know you are looking for. <BR/><BR/>BarbaraBarbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10689314012050314027noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11668983.post-1115130038890299942005-05-03T09:20:00.000-05:002005-05-03T09:20:00.000-05:00Lancaster graciously recanted in the article "Seco...Lancaster graciously recanted in the article "Second Thoughts on the Paperless Society." Library Journal, Sept. 15, 1999. p. 48-51.Alechttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04503895513959778422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11668983.post-1115122713080959512005-05-03T07:18:00.000-05:002005-05-03T07:18:00.000-05:00It's always amusing to see how people dream up way...It's always amusing to see how people dream up ways to do what we've done for 100 years and say "hey, guys - guess what! we can make things easier to find!" And even more amusing to watch the language evolve. Cataloging - boring! Taxonomies, tagging, folksonomies - way cool. I mean, tagging is like guerilla art, right? Taxonomy sounds significant and deep, and folksonomies is one of those words you think you should know but you're not quite sure what it means so you nod and try to act as if your hip to it. Whereas cataloging belongs in those libraries that for some odd reason are always described as either dusty or musty. (Achoo!) <BR/><BR/>I may just have to check out this hero of yours. I have to confess I tend to equate Lancaster with his notorious "paperless society" predition. He was 90% right and 100% wrong. <BR/><BR/>BarbaraBarbarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10689314012050314027noreply@blogger.com