As I sit back and watch the newest installment of The Librarian series on TNT, I’m reminded of one statement that was said. “Sacrificing your needs for the greater good is the difference between a good librarian and a great librarian.” Which started me thinking, what are some other differences between a good and great librarian? Jim Collins has had plenty of experience in distinguishing between “Good to Great,” but I believe when it comes to librarians the difference lies within service and adaptation.
In the two articles for this week’s reading are over the adaptation needed for the Web 2.0 and the invisible web and how individuals can adapt and use those resources: Indexing the Invisible Web: a Survey by Yanbo Ru and Ellis Horowitz and The Terrible Twos: Web 2.0, Library 2.0, and More by Greg R. Notess.
Ru’s article discussed the existence and continuous growth of the invisible web. The invisible web according to Ru is “the vast collection of information that is accessible via the worldwide web, but is not indexed by conventional search engines.” The invisible web since it is not indexed by conventional search engines posses as a problem when attempting to organize the material on the web that is easily accessible for all users.
Because of indexing the interface of invisible web sites is insufficient the content on these sites is unable to discover. The inability to maintain invisible web directories is only added more problems to the findability issue. According to Ru invisible web sites confront three challenges:
because of the lack of knowledge of the underlying database schema, it is difficult to generate form assignments that are guaranteed to yield information-rich resulting pages;
interfaces of the invisible web sites, even those belonging to the same domain, are very different, and therefore it is hard to design a form-filling method that is appropriate for all the search interfaces; and
the volume of the information in the invisible web is of a magnitude greater than that in the PIW, which is more than can be reasonably indexed and searched using today’s technology.
There needs to be a change so this content can be found and used. Invisible web standards need to be addressed so the finability and accessibility can succeed.
Notess’s article covered the 2.0 society in which we are currently living. It seems that everything has been categorized as a 2.0 from the web to Nissan’s new ad campaign. But what exactly is this 2.0 business? Examples of Web 2.0 include: del.icio.us, Flickr, Listible, Writely, Yahoo! Answers, Google Maps, Meebo, Ajax, blogs, APIs, clouds, CSS, RSS, social networking, tagging, and wikis. According to Notess the biggest difference between the Web and Web 2.0 is user interactivity.
The Web 2.0 phenomenon has spread to other venues as well such as Library 2.0 and News 2.0. Library 2.0 or L2 is now the desire to rethink and retool library services. As libraries are looking for a new niche to help relate to customers and establish a more technical edge, L2 is the way. Libraries over time have shifted and now have an opportunity to be on the cutting edge of upcoming technologies and help entice customers to become a part of the 2.0 society as well.
As you can see from these two articles the web is changing. To be a good librarian you know about these things, but to be a great librarian, you incorporate these things. You help establish content, create resources, and share your knowledge for the greater good. That’s the difference!