By Stephen Downes
March 1, 2005
Using RSS Enclosures in Schools
The key sentence is the next to last: "Drill this all
down a bit and you could see the potential in terms of
individualizing content through individualized feeds. James
is running down that path too." Make sure you follow the
link. By Will Richardson, Weblogg-Ed, March 1, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
RAND Worldwide Launches SOLO Learning
Tool
From the press release: "Rand A
Technology Corporation... is launching a new learning tool
called SOLO (Searchable Online Learning Objects). SOLO
provides users of engineering software applications from
developers such as Dassault Systemes, PTC, and Autodesk,
access to an online searchable database of learning objects
that will assist them with their day-to-day use of the
software." Oh, hey, does that mean users of these learning
objects will not be signing up for 39-hour university
classes or programmes of study? The somewhat sparse SOLO
home page is available
here. By Press Release, Rand A Technology Corporation,
March 1, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Oh, What a Tangled Web...
Discussion of the use of content management systems to
manage unruly university websites. Readers will blanche at
the prices being paid - "the average price of a web content
management system in 1999 was $500,000. In 2003, it was
$150,000. Today, mid-market CMS systems fall into the
$50,000 to $100,000 price range." It is only at the end of
the article that you see a reference to open source content
management systems, a reference that is, unfortunately, not
sufficiently informative; readers would have no idea of how
Drupal, for example, stacks up against the commercial
systems. By Jean Marie Angelo, University Business, March
1, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Implementing Real-world Structured
Searches
Is this how folksonomies are supposed
to work? "Hint to conference planners: If you want the
blogosphere to synchronize its coverage of your event, pick
a tag and promote it." No, that's just the big spike
speaking again. This is better, isn't it: "there are also
implicit tags - namely links - that identify items about
the conference." Of course. That's what I demonstrate here.
"Can these ad hoc syntaxes be collaboratively extended?"
Yes. That's what I propose here
(and elsewhere). And in a related item, more discussion on
tag
spam and the, um, "interestingness" of results. And in
another related
item, Matt Locke writes that folksonomies "are only
useful in a context in which nothing is at stake." Now some
people may disagree
with me, and that's fine, but I'd sure like to know why. By
Jon Udell, InfoWorld, February 25, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Drugs That Speak To You
I have
spoken on numerous occasions of fishing rods that teach you
to fish and strawberry jam that gives instructions on the
manufacture and use of the product. Learning, I said, would
be embedded in everyday fixtures and devices the way
writing is today. The devices would use RFID and content
would be located via a distributed learning resources
network. People didn't disagree with me but I saw a lot of
those "there goes Stephen again" looks. Well, now it
exists, at least as a prototype. By Asina Pornwasin, The
Nation, February 28, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Concepts and a Design for Fair Use and
Privacy in DRM
I don't think this is the
answer, but the reasoning in this article is worth sharing.
"We propose approaching this problem by a set of new design
concepts bringing access to process context information to
DRM license control systems. These concepts provide privacy
by separating user and product identities and by enabling
distribution history tracking." All very fine, but I doubt
that I will ever see "hardware locking" as an "advantage".
By Pasi Tyrväinen, D-Lib Magazine, February 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
'Blog People' Respond
Facing
criticism on the American Library Association Council for
an article
criticizing Google Scholar published in the L.A. Times and
an ill-conceived follow-up
about the "Blog People", ALA President Michael Gorman is
now claiming to have written in jest. "The piece (LJ,
February 15th 2005) was intended to be satirical," he writes
on the ALA Council list server. Does anyone believe this?
Of course not. This
is satire. He adds, "My views on 'blogs' have nothing to do
with my activities as ALA president-elect or president,"
thinking, perhaps, that nobody would notice the words
'American Library Association' in the credits for both
articles. "Nice. Really nice. Good use of the ALA
presidential bully pulpit. No citations, of course," comments
Council member K.G. Schneider on the same list (likely
sources have now been found).
Much more discussion on the Web4Lib
archive. Other members raised
concern about the now-tarnished image of the ALA, a
concern well-founded as criticism has swept from its roots
in the conservative
blogosphere (no doubt motivated by Gorman's opposition
to the Patriot Act) to a widespread and general
condemnation. Writes
Rochelle, "I've read more concentrated bad-mouthing
about libraries, librarians and the ALA the past two days,
than I've ever seen, and that's not A-OK." The damage done
by Gorman's comments far outweights the good work
undertaken by the Council in Salinas,
and at a fraction of the cost. And the public silence by
the ALA on Gorman's published position indicates
acquiescence. The ALA should act, and clear the record. By
Jessamyn West, librarian.net, February 25, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Unanswered Questions about Open
Access
The purpose of this," writes the
author, "is to put the brakes on the Open Access
bandwagon." But despite its being published by a professor
in a published journal, the article is filled with weak
argument and outright misinformation. The first concern is
that open access publication wity reduce the author's
standing; "One suspects that Open Access materials will not
be oft-cited by others." In fact, research proves exactly
the
opposite,
that open access materials are more frequently cited. The
author warns of publishing fees for open access journals,
stating that he has never paid such fees. But publishing
fees are
the norm in commercial publishing, and much less so in
open access publishing. He suggests that open access may
cost libraries more: "what are the likely up-front fees for
Open Access that libraries will be asked to absorb." The
answer, thus far, is 'none' - a statistic conveniently
ignored. Finally, he asks, "what of the publishers? From
their perspective, if it isn’t broken, why are we fixing
it?" Perhaps he is not aware of the crisis
in
serials
publication.
More and more, as I watch the the defenders of traditional
scholarship acquit themselves, I wonder how they could have
discovered knowledge at all amidst the flim-flammery,
deception and blatant fabrication that seems to
characterize so much of it. By G.E. Gorman, Library Link,
January, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Remember...
[Refer] - send an item to your friends
[Research] - find related items
[Reflect] - post a comment about this item
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter?
Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list at http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/website/subscribe.cgi
[About This NewsLetter] [OLDaily Archives] [Send me your comments]
Copyright © 2005 Stephen Downes
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons License.