• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
MLA Plenary Session IV - David Rothman
 

MLA Plenary Session IV - David Rothman

on

  • 4,286 views

A short talk defining Web/Library/Medicine/Health 2.0 for the Medical Library Association's 2008 annual meeting

A short talk defining Web/Library/Medicine/Health 2.0 for the Medical Library Association's 2008 annual meeting

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,286
Views on SlideShare
3,276
Embed Views
1,010

Actions

Likes
5
Downloads
0
Comments
0

12 Embeds 1,010

http://davidrothman.net 650
http://tunaiskewl.wordpress.com 310
http://feeds.feedburner.com 33
http://www.davidrothman.net 7
http://mywebcollection.blogspot.com 2
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 2
http://www.newsblur.com 1
http://abtasty.com 1
http://www.google.com 1
http://b2training.blackboard.com 1
http://maricopa-dev.blackboard.com 1
http://www.365dailyjournal.com 1
More...

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Where does the term “Web 2.0” come from?

MLA Plenary Session IV - David Rothman MLA Plenary Session IV - David Rothman Presentation Transcript

  • “ Web 2.0” http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html Tim Dale Dougherty, web pioneer and O'Reilly VP, noted that far from having "crashed", the web was more important than ever, with exciting new applications and sites popping up with surprising regularity. What's more , the companies that had survived the collapse seemed to have some things in common . Could it be that the dot-com collapse marked some kind of turning point for the web, such that a call to action such as "Web 2.0" might make sense? We agreed that it did, and so the Web 2.0 Conference was born. [David’s emphasis]
  • Why Web “ 2.0 ”? 10 th Edition = Version 10.0 12 th Edition = Version 12.0 11 th Edition = Version 11.0
  • The “2.0” is a metaphor Upgrade? Program? Movement? Version of the Web?
  • The “2.0” is a metaphor Upgrade? Program? Movement? Version of the Web? Just jargon for a set of trends
  • Don’t take MY word for it: “… I think Web 2.0 is of course a piece of jargon… … the idea of the Web as interaction between people is really what the Web is. That was what it was designed to be as a collaborative space where people can interact.”
  • Don’t take MY word for it: “… I think Web 2.0 is of course a piece of jargon… … the idea of the Web as interaction between people is really what the Web is. That was what it was designed to be as a collaborative space where people can interact.” - Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee , Inventor of the World Wide Web http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/podcast/dwi/cm-int082206.txt Digest summary here: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060901-7650.html
  • Why care about Geeky Jargon? “ Web 2.0” is jargon used as shorthand to collectively describe a number of trends about what people are doing with/on the Web since the dotcom bust
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution Perpetual Beta (Improvement, User-Worship) Blurring line between consumer and creator “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution The Web: It’s Not Just for Geeks Anymore
  • “ Real-world” testing by users outside of development team
    • Perpetual, incremental improvement
    • Judging success based on USER input
    “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Perpetual Beta
  • Who decides how highly ranked a particular page is in Google search results? “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating data
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating data
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating data
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating data
  • “ Old” Media (Print, Radio, Television)
    • Unidirectional
    • Expensive to produce
    • Defined roles:
      • Creator(s): -Editor -Station manager -Network
      • Consumer: You
    “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Blurring line between consumer and creator
  • “ Old” Media (Print, Radio, Television)
    • Unidirectional
    • Expensive to produce
    • Defined roles:
      • Creator(s): -Editor -Station manager -Network
      • Consumer: You
    “ New” Media (Web)
    • Multidirectional
    • Inexpensive/Free
    • Each person can be a Consumer/Creator as best suits him/herself
    “ Participatory Web” “Read/Write Web” “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Blurring line between consumer and creator
  • So what’s “Library 2.0”? Using “Web 2.0” Tools in Libraries? Making Libraries more “patron-centered”, participatory or transparent? Depends on who you ask! Toward Academic Library 2.0: Development and Application of a Library 2.0 Methodology Michael Habib (Master’s Thesis) http://hdl.handle.net/1901/356 Library 2.0 and "Library 2.0" Walt Crawford's Cites & Insights Volume 6, Number 2: Midwinter 2006  ISSN 1534-0937 http://citesandinsights.info/civ6i2.pdf Library 2.0: Service for the next-generation library Michael E. Casey and Laura C. Savastinuk Library Journal, 9/1/2006 http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html
  • So what’s “Library 2.0”? Library 2.0: Service for the next-generation library Michael E. Casey and Laura C. Savastinuk Library Journal, 9/1/2006 http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html “ The heart of Library 2.0 is user-centered change. It is a model for library service that encourages constant and purposeful change , inviting user participation in the creation of both the physical and the virtual services they want, supported by consistently evaluating services . It also attempts to reach new users and better serve current ones through improved customer-driven offerings .” “ What makes a service Library 2.0? Any service, physical or virtual, that successfully reaches users, is evaluated frequently, and makes use of customer input is a Library 2.0 service. Even older, traditional services can be Library 2.0 if criteria are met. Similarly, being new is not enough to make a service Library 2.0.”
  • So what’s “Library 2.0”? This isn’t a new model - this is what the best libraries have been doing for quite some time. Why do we need a new term for it?
    • Constant and purposeful change
    • User participation in the creation of services
    • Consistently evaluating services
    • Customer-driven offerings
    • Successfully reaches users
  • So what’s “Library 2.0”? “ Library 2.0 describes a subset of library services designed to meet user needs caused by the direct and peripheral effects of Web 2.0 services leveraging concepts of the Read/Write Web, the Web as Platform, The Long Tail, harnessing collective intelligence, network effects, core datasets from user contributions, and lightweight programming models.” Toward Academic Library 2.0: Development and Application of a Library 2.0 Methodology Michael Habib (Master’s Thesis) http://hdl.handle.net/1901/356
  • “ Library 2.0”
    • Even the most vocal proponents don’t agree on a definition, or sometimes say a definition isn’t needed
    • Can be needlessly divisive when explained poorly
    • There are more specific, well-defined terms which can be used to discuss the very same matters
    • If you use it, please use it in quotes
  • “ Medicine 2.0” The use of Web 2.0 tools in medicine
  • “ Health 2.0” The use of Web 2.0 tools by healthcare consumers or sometimes refers to “patient empowerment”
  • “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications” Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution Perpetual Beta (Improvement, User-Centrism) Blurring line between consumer and creator “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating
  • Less Difficulty/Cost in Production & Distribution Perpetual Beta (Improvement, User-Centrism) Blurring line between consumer and creator “ Social Software” – Sharing/aggregating Produce and Distribute More- Easily & Inexpensively Constantly Improve, Listen to Patrons Be Web creators , not just consumers Share Expertise, Pool Experience, Build Resources “ Web as Platform” / “Rich Internet Applications”
  • Produce and Distribute More
    • Constantly Improve, Listen to Patrons
    Be Web creators , not just consumers
    • Share Expertise, Pool Experience, Build Resources
    Same Game, New Tools:
    • Evaluate resources for consumers and clinicians
    New Game: