Comments on: “Draft Principles for Digitized Content” from the Digitization Policy Task Force of ALA’s Office for Information Technology Policy http://dltj.org/article/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/ We're Disrupted, We're Librarians, and We're Not Going to Take It Anymore Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:48:39 +0000 hourly 1 By: timothy: New with me - MyBlogLoghttp://dltj.org/article/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-34277 timothy: New with me - MyBlogLog Wed, 12 Nov 2008 02:09:58 +0000 http://dltj.org/2007/03/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/#comment-34277 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] View Full Profile timothy bookmarked a link “Draft Principles for Digitized Content” from the Digitization Policy Task Force of ALA’s Offi... 5 hours ago Delicious | Topics: ala, oitp, principles, digital | Add delicious to your profile [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> Kramer auto Pingback[...] View Full Profile timothy bookmarked a link “Draft Principles for Digitized Content” from the Digitization Policy Task Force of ALA’s Offi… 5 hours ago Delicious | Topics: ala, oitp, principles, digital | Add delicious to your profile [...]

]]> By: Inquiring Librarian: ALA Draft Digitization Principleshttp://dltj.org/article/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-14143 Inquiring Librarian: ALA Draft Digitization Principles Tue, 17 Apr 2007 02:44:47 +0000 http://dltj.org/2007/03/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/#comment-14143 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] 10:45 PM, Peter Murray [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> Kramer auto Pingback[...] 10:45 PM, Peter Murray [...]

]]> By: the jesterhttp://dltj.org/article/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-13525 the jester Thu, 29 Mar 2007 01:48:16 +0000 http://dltj.org/2007/03/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/#comment-13525 And now your comment, Jonathan, brings to mind a discussion at a former employer where we were trying to make that same distinction between "digital" service and — what, uhm, "in-person" ... "traditional" ... "old" ... As I recall, we never did find a satisfactory division between the two, and ended up just calling them "services."I think your comment is referring to <a href="http://orweblog.oclc.org/archives/001307.html" rel="nofollow">Lorcan Dempsey's post "Moving to a 'single business' systems environment"</a> from earlier this week describing the <a href="http://www.nla.gov.au/dsp/documents/itag.pdf" rel="nofollow">National Library of Australia IT Architecture Project Report</a> [pdf]. It is a great post, and I've been meaning to print off and read the project report. And now your comment, Jonathan, brings to mind a discussion at a former employer where we were trying to make that same distinction between “digital” service and — what, uhm, “in-person” … “traditional” … “old” … As I recall, we never did find a satisfactory division between the two, and ended up just calling them “services.”

I think your comment is referring to Lorcan Dempsey’s post “Moving to a ‘single business’ systems environment” from earlier this week describing the National Library of Australia IT Architecture Project Report [pdf]. It is a great post, and I’ve been meaning to print off and read the project report.

]]> By: Jonathan Rochkindhttp://dltj.org/article/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/comment-page-1/#comment-13500 Jonathan Rochkind Tue, 27 Mar 2007 20:36:40 +0000 http://dltj.org/2007/03/ala-oitp-digital-proposal/#comment-13500 I've thought for a while now that the phrase "Digital Library" is essentially meaningless. In 2007, the vast majority of all libraries have digital services and digital collections. So are they all digital libraries? Or is that phrase reserved for libraries that *only* have digital services and/or collections? How many of those are there?Am I right that in reality a self-proclaimed 'digital library' is usually a unit of another (ordinary? non-digital?) library or library consortium? I am reminded of a blog post I just read, that now I can't find, that talked about libraries needing to behave as if they were single unified businesses, with one unified data corpus, and a unified set of services. I’ve thought for a while now that the phrase “Digital Library” is essentially meaningless. In 2007, the vast majority of all libraries have digital services and digital collections. So are they all digital libraries? Or is that phrase reserved for libraries that *only* have digital services and/or collections? How many of those are there?

Am I right that in reality a self-proclaimed ‘digital library’ is usually a unit of another (ordinary? non-digital?) library or library consortium? I am reminded of a blog post I just read, that now I can’t find, that talked about libraries needing to behave as if they were single unified businesses, with one unified data corpus, and a unified set of services.

]]>