In the DLTJ Thursday Threads this week: an analysis of how external services included on library web pages can impact patron privacy, pointers to a series of helpful posts from OCLC on communication between software users and software developers, and lastly an update on the continuing discussion of the Kuali Foundation Board’s announcement forming a commercial entity.
Before we get started on this week’s threads, I want to point out a free online symposium that LYRASIS is performing next week on sustainable cultural heritage open source software. Details are on the FOSS4Lib site, you can register on the LYRASIS events site, and then join the open discussion on the discuss.foss4lib.org site before, during and after the symposium.
Feel free to send this to others you think might be interested in the topics. If you find these threads interesting and useful, you might want to add the Thursday Threads RSS Feed to your feed reader or subscribe to e-mail delivery using the form to the right. If you would like a more raw and immediate version of these types of stories, watch my Pinboard bookmarks (or subscribe to its feed in your feed reader). Items posted to my Pinboard bookmarks are also sent out as tweets; you can follow me on Twitter. Comments and tips, as always, are welcome.
Analysis of Privacy Leakage on a Library Catalog Webpage
My post last month about privacy on library websites, and the surrounding discussion on the Code4Lib list prompted me to do a focused investigation, which I presented at last weeks Code4Lib-NYC meeting.
I looked at a single web page from the NYPL online catalog. I used Chrome developer tools to trace all the requests my browser made in the process of building that page. The catalog page in question is for The Communist Manifesto. It’s here: http://nypl.bibliocommons.com/item/show/18235020052907_communist_manifesto. …
So here are the results.
Series of Posts on Software Development Practices from OCLC
This is the first post in a series on software development practices. We’re launching the series with a couple of posts aimed at helping those who might not have a technical background communicate their feature requests to developers.
OCLC has started an excellent set of posts on how to improve communication between software users and software developers. The first three have been posted so far with another one expected today:
- Software Development Practices: What's the Problem?
- Software Development Practices: Telling Your User's Story
- Software Development Practices: Getting Specific with Acceptance Criteria
I’ve bookmarked them and will be referring to them when talking with our own members about software development needs.
Kuali 2.0 Discussion Continues
…I thought of my beehives and how the overall bee community supports that community/ hive. The community needs to be protected, prioritized, supported and nourished any way possible. Each entity, the queen, the workers and the drones all know their jobs, which revolve around protecting supporting and nourishing the community.
Even if something disrupts the community, everyone knows their role and they get back to work in spite of the disruption. The real problem within the Kuali Community, with the establishment of the Kuali Commercial Entity now is that various articles, social media outlets, and even the communication from the senior Kuali leadership to the community members, have created a situation in which many do not have a good feel for their role in protecting, prioritizing, supporting and nourishing the community.
The Kuali Foundation Board has set a direction for our second decade and at this time there are many unknowns as we work through priorities and options with each of the Kuali Project Boards. Kuali is a large and complex community of many institutions, firms, and individuals. We are working with projects now and hope to have some initial roadmaps very soon.
As the library community that built a true next-generation library management system, the future of OLE’s development and long-term success is in our hands. We intend to continue to provide free and open access to our community designed and built software. The OLE board is strongly committed to providing a community driven option for library management workflow.
Building on previous updates here, the story of the commercialization of the Kuali collaborative continues. I missed the post from Bruce Taggart in last week’s update, and for the main DLTJ Thursday Threads audience this status update from the Open Library Environment project should be most interesting. Given the lack of information, it is hard not to parse each word of formal statements for underlying meanings. In the case of Dr. Taggart’s post about OLE, I’m leaning heavily on wondering what “community designed and built software” means. The Kuali 2.0 FAQ still says “the current plan is for the Kuali codebase to be forked and relicensed under the Affero General Public License (AGPL).” As Charles Severance points out, the Affero license can be a path to vendor lock-in. So is there to be a “community” version that has a life of its own in under the Educational Community License while the KualiCo develops features only available under the Affero license? It is entirely possible that too much can be read into too few words, so I (for one) continue to ponder these questions and watch for the plan to evolve.