<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The new bandwagon is the anti-bandwagon?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://walt.lishost.org/2008/01/the-new-bandwagon-is-the-anti-bandwagon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/01/the-new-bandwagon-is-the-anti-bandwagon/</link>
	<description>The library voice of the radical middle.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 17:18:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/01/the-new-bandwagon-is-the-anti-bandwagon/comment-page-1/#comment-31524</link>
		<dc:creator>walt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 01:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=693#comment-31524</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting--and I certainly see that libraries can and in some cases should become more publishers and producers. (Not &quot;&lt;b&gt;the&lt;/b&gt; producer or publisher&quot; any more than libraries are or were &lt;b&gt;the&lt;/b&gt; place for information or books--but perhaps an important player in publishing and production.)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting&#8211;and I certainly see that libraries can and in some cases should become more publishers and producers. (Not &#8220;<b>the</b> producer or publisher&#8221; any more than libraries are or were <b>the</b> place for information or books&#8211;but perhaps an important player in publishing and production.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Tyckoson</title>
		<link>http://walt.lishost.org/2008/01/the-new-bandwagon-is-the-anti-bandwagon/comment-page-1/#comment-31523</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Tyckoson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:52:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://walt.lishost.org/?p=693#comment-31523</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Walt,

I appreciate your differentiation of the tools from the hype regarding Library 2.0 (with our without &quot;&quot;).  One issue that I have not seen others address is that the assumptioon behind the number 2.0 is that we have never previously evolved beyond the very first version of what Library means.  I think that we have had a number of systemic changes over our history that would have been significant new &quot;versions&quot; if that concept and numbering system had been in use at the time.  At the risk of the anguish of your readers, I will share something that I wrote that was just published in RUSQ as an aside to my column (v. 47 Winter 2007 p. 113)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Library 4.0 

With all of the hype about Web 2.0, some people are promoting the concept of Library 2.0.  Although the motivation behind Library 2.0 is all well and good, they donâ€™t have the numbers right.  Libraries have gone through a long period of innovation and are well beyond level two.  In my opinion, a numbered series of â€œversionsâ€ of the concept of Library would read as follows.  And like any good upgrade, each â€œversionâ€ of Library incorporates all of the developments and features of those that came beforehand.

Library 1.0.  Historically, the first function of â€œLibraryâ€ was to build collections.  This function dates back to ancient times and continues with us today.  During version one, libraries focused entirely on materials.

Library 2.0.  The second version of â€œLibraryâ€ is the one that focused on organization.  This version began some time around the sixteenth century and continues to be a part of all later versions.  During this era, we developed organizational schema to make our collections easier to use.  Cataloging, indexing, and metadata are all modern remnants of Library 2.0.

Library 3.0.  The third edition of â€œLibraryâ€ is the one that focuses on service.  Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, libraries began to provide direct personal assistance to users.  This is the version of the Library that spawned the reference desk, instruction, readerâ€™s advisory, and even this journal.

Library 4.0.  We are currently in the transition stage from Library 3.0 to Library 4.0.  I would characterize Library 4.0 as the era in which the Library serves not merely as the collector and organizer of information, but as the producer or publisher of information.  Modern technologies such as digitization and telecommunications allow us to distribute material that is unique to our institution, making it available to the rest of the world.   Exactly how this will affect the traditional publishing industry is not yet known, but version 4.0 should look very different in the future than our version 3.0 of today.

There will no doubt someday be a Library 5.0.  What will make 5.0 unique is something that future generations will need to define.  For now, letâ€™s stop looking into the past by calling it Library 2.0 and begin looking at the present by calling it Library 4.0.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Walt,</p>
<p>I appreciate your differentiation of the tools from the hype regarding Library 2.0 (with our without &#8220;&#8221;).  One issue that I have not seen others address is that the assumptioon behind the number 2.0 is that we have never previously evolved beyond the very first version of what Library means.  I think that we have had a number of systemic changes over our history that would have been significant new &#8220;versions&#8221; if that concept and numbering system had been in use at the time.  At the risk of the anguish of your readers, I will share something that I wrote that was just published in RUSQ as an aside to my column (v. 47 Winter 2007 p. 113)<br />
&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<br />
Library 4.0 </p>
<p>With all of the hype about Web 2.0, some people are promoting the concept of Library 2.0.  Although the motivation behind Library 2.0 is all well and good, they donâ€™t have the numbers right.  Libraries have gone through a long period of innovation and are well beyond level two.  In my opinion, a numbered series of â€œversionsâ€ of the concept of Library would read as follows.  And like any good upgrade, each â€œversionâ€ of Library incorporates all of the developments and features of those that came beforehand.</p>
<p>Library 1.0.  Historically, the first function of â€œLibraryâ€ was to build collections.  This function dates back to ancient times and continues with us today.  During version one, libraries focused entirely on materials.</p>
<p>Library 2.0.  The second version of â€œLibraryâ€ is the one that focused on organization.  This version began some time around the sixteenth century and continues to be a part of all later versions.  During this era, we developed organizational schema to make our collections easier to use.  Cataloging, indexing, and metadata are all modern remnants of Library 2.0.</p>
<p>Library 3.0.  The third edition of â€œLibraryâ€ is the one that focuses on service.  Beginning in the mid-nineteenth century, libraries began to provide direct personal assistance to users.  This is the version of the Library that spawned the reference desk, instruction, readerâ€™s advisory, and even this journal.</p>
<p>Library 4.0.  We are currently in the transition stage from Library 3.0 to Library 4.0.  I would characterize Library 4.0 as the era in which the Library serves not merely as the collector and organizer of information, but as the producer or publisher of information.  Modern technologies such as digitization and telecommunications allow us to distribute material that is unique to our institution, making it available to the rest of the world.   Exactly how this will affect the traditional publishing industry is not yet known, but version 4.0 should look very different in the future than our version 3.0 of today.</p>
<p>There will no doubt someday be a Library 5.0.  What will make 5.0 unique is something that future generations will need to define.  For now, letâ€™s stop looking into the past by calling it Library 2.0 and begin looking at the present by calling it Library 4.0.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
