VALA 2010

I was lucky enough to go for a 1/2 day this year thanks to Health Libraries Inc. I went down on the train on Wednesday morning and did the Trade Exhibition (brilliant) then did sessions in the afternoon. Notes from the sessions I attended:

Developing Trove: by Warwick Cathro & Susan Collier

Trove, as in treasure trove
For the public and end user
Streamlined and integrated
Interactive, adding tags/reviews etc.
Looking at adding RSS feeds
Journals should come online in the second half of the year

Libraries at the network level: by Roy Tennant

API - method for one software application to communicate with another (ie. using book images in your catalogue from Amazon/Library Thing)

Linked data - naming things and stating relationships; expose data; link your data to other data.

Cloud computing - a style of computing in which dynamically scalable and often visualised resources are provided as a service over the internet

Open source software:
Cons - no control; network space; connectivity/speed
Pros - no need to store; pay as go; no big upfront fees

Xerses: Worldcat(books), Metalib (journals)

Problem - the data needs to be continued and accessible in the future

WOW - very full on, a bit overwhelming and most went right over my head!

The Louvre DNP: by Stephanie Orlic

Using multi-lingual system
Using tagging/reviews/leaving impressions
Touch screen/Audio/PDA user guides?RFID tickets/3D design
Interactive, enlarge/zoom/step into painting
Deconstructing/reconstructing layer by layer - going beyond the naked eye

Top trends panel: user generated content

How to check user content. Is it authoritative? Should we use the info/tag?
Could treat them as "letters to the editor" rather than sensing them.
But still need a degree of control. ie. user must identify themselves.
Leave it as a comment.
Cannot "fact check" everything.
Users will then discuss amongst themselves and the authoritative answer will emerge.
However, moderation is required to an extent.
Don't look at barriers to including user content. Make it easier.
As long as the original library data cannot be changed and the user data is clearly highlighted then all is good.
Tags make this more accessible rather than using LCSH/DDC which can be outdated. This data can be used with synonym lists to make content more relevant/accessible.
Librarians make mistakes as they aren't necessarily subject specialists in the field they are cataloging.
You can track "search terms" with some systems then see what it is your users click through to.
Users only tag if it delivers something back to them.
LCSH/DDc is the seed/structure. Users can go from this starting point.


All in all a great (exhausting day).