What is this Library 2.0, anyway?

So here we are with step #15 and we finally get around to answering what is Library 2.0. Well, as I understand it, it is taking the technology available on the Internet and putting it into the hands of the masses. Kinda like a digital Prometheus.

So, did you click on word "Prometheus" and get transported to Wikipedia? Wikipedia is an example of Web 2.0; instead of a bunch of experts writing an encyclopedia and we read it, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia created by contributors like you or me. Web 2.0 is a more hands-on, cooperative approach to utilities and features found on the internet.

A good article regarding the future of libraries with Web 2.0 is John J. Riemer's OCLC newsletter article, To Better Bibliographic Services. He describes utilizing and combining features to help patrons/users locate information more effectively and to focus in on their needs and interests with utilities like RSS. For instance, RSS feeds can be made to deliver specific content to a user like information on Italian Greyhounds.

Interestingly, Reimer discusses how metadata creation should be streamlined and how duplication can be avoided with "advocacy and coordination of a bibliographic utility, such as OCLC." But he also says how libraries should be open to features found on Amazon and Google including tagging from anyone, not just those people who are recognized as authorities on a subject. But, as I have said in a previous post, I do not like tags and I believe there needs to be something akin to a "bibliographic utility" or a central location like OCLC or Del.icio.us to verify tags, to add synonym rings, and to create a hierarchy or taxonomy.

I should point out that I am not against the idea of tagging, but I would like to see better structure before we allow the untrained masses to haphazardly assign tags.

Let me give you an example of a tagging problem that I mistakenly made. On my post about a technology item, I discussed an online game created to help label or tag images on the web so that visually impaired users can identify what the images are. Because the game is timed, there is no real way to research the images. Therefore, during a game, the image of Justin Timberlake came up and I began adding tags such as "gay" and "homosexual." This was in no way meant to be a homophobic attack or commentary on Mr. Timberlake. I simply confused him with his 'N Sync bandmate, Lance Bass who had recently announced his homosexuality.

So, as I said before, is there anyone verifying these tags? If so, how well known is the utility or website/instituition? These are questions that need to be answered before we have to go back and clean years of messy tagging.

The ESP Game (it's not what you think)

In an article in the Washington Post, I learned of a fun and addictive game called the ESP Game. The purpose of the game is give short descriptions to random images. You have an anonymous partner who is doing the same. When the two of you match a description, you get another picture. The game is timed so you will be partnered with different people each game.

So, why is this game important? Well, the article explains that there are programs that can read aloud words from the internet for people who are visually impaired, but these programs cannot recognize images unless they are tagged or labeled. Because there are so many images on the web that are without tags, Luis Von Ahn of the Carnegie Mellon University created the ESP Game to get the masses (that's us) to tag a lot of those images.

Here is the link for the Washington Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/20/AR2006112001200_pf.html

And the link for the game: http://www.espgame.org

Check out their other game Phetch where players are given a description and they hunt down a picture from the internet.

Have fun!