ola 2014: the future of library systems
TRANSCRIPT
The Future of Library Systems
MJ SuhonosJanuary 30, 2014
①
The Problem
The industry is broken
• The market is increasingly
oligopolistic
• Next-generation systems (LSP/URM)
are still monolithic, multi-purpose
silos
Who owns your data?
APIs are a lie
Who owns your systems?
The Cloud is a lie
Who Owns YOU?
Who Owns YOU?
OCLC record use policy
• Trying to protect their business model by
preventing sharing
• Deliberately exploited uncertainty of
legality
• Librarians argued vocally for public domain
• Policy retracted and changed
http://wiki.code4lib.org/index.php/OCLC_Policy_Change
We don’t just need better systems.
We need better vendors.
②
Our Demands
We want our systems to be:
• Driven by our evolving requirements,
not vendor-led “features”
• Modified on our schedule, on our
terms
• Driven by technology librarians, not
library technology
Make things simpler
• Reduce duplication & reliance on
legacy technology
• Leverage modern technology, less
“enterprise” dependencies
• Harmonize services across multiple
platforms
Improve choice
• Promote specialization of many
systems
• Control / choice over which data
providers to integrate
• Use open standards throughout,
including within APIs
Move libraries forward
• Use multiple concurrent metadata
standards, including non-library ones
• Share library data openly on the web
• Facilitate transition to post-library (ie.
Web) technology
How do we get there?
Openness Movements
• Open Access: 1997 (SPARC)
• Open Source: 1998 (Open Source
Summit)
③
Openness Outward
Open Data
“freely usable, reusable and
redistributable, subject, at most, to
the requirements to attribute and
share-alike”
http://opendefinition.org/okd/
Open Data
• Legal and policy framework for data
interoperability
• Clarifies the terms and purposes of data
use
• Allows for a spectrum of licensing options
– see Creative Commons
Why Open Data?
• Data is only useful when someone
does something with it
• No data = zero possibilities
• Unrealized potential due to siloing
Bring library datato the web
2010: TPL Open Data
• Submit ted the entire catalogue to
the Internet Archive
• 2.5 million MARC records, about 2GB
http://archive.org/details/
marc_toronto_public_library
2012: Dentographs
Visualizing Library Holdings
http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/6300
“The coolest thing to do to your data will be thought of by
someone else.”
Implementing Open Data
• Consider the impact of usage
restrictions when negotiating
contracts
• Establish institutional policies for
data sharing and licensing
④
Openness Inward
Linked Data
• Technical framework for data
interoperability
• A common language for sharing data
and relations online
• Unrealized potential due to
incompatibility
A new way of thinking
• Fundamentally differs from data
concepts of the 20th century
• From concept of "records" as
bounded sets, to an unbounded set
of "statements”
Based on new technology
• Same technology as WWW
– URIs for names, HTTP for retrieval, plus
RDF
– Decentralized, open standards
• Still organized facts about things, but
infinitely more flexible structure
2011: Library Linked Data
• W3C Library Linked Data incubator group
• Panel of invited librarians, academics,
experts
• “to help increase global interoperability
of library data on the Semantic Web”
• Final report produced October 2011
Why Linked Data?
• Break data out of silos by linking to data
within & between multiple organizations
• Anyone can contribute unique data;
allow local experts to curate their own
• Integrate using a universal non-library
framework
Bring web technologyto libraries
2011-2013: LODLAM
LODLAM
• Informal, grassroots group working
with LOD pertaining to libraries,
archives, museums
• Pair of small 2-day summits, #LODLAM
• “Radially Open Cultural Heritage Data
on the [Semantic] Web”
2012: BIBFRAME
BIBFRAME
• LC initiative to implement
bibliographic description using Linked
Data
• Experimental new approach to
modeling library data relations
• A long-term replacement for MARC
Implementing Linked Data• Participate in LODLAM, BIBFRAME
• Start using web-based (W3C)
standards
• Stop using proprietary vendor
technology
• Choose vendors who embrace
openness
⑤
Finale
Linked Open Data
Linked
Data
Open Data
Semantic Web
Benefits of Linked Open Data
• Will be able to use mainstream
solutions
• Can give libraries a wider choice of
vendors and developers to recruit
from and interact with
Benefits of Linked Open Data
• Much larger community to provide
support, development, sharing
• Smaller institutions can make
themselves more visible and
connected
Major goals for libraries
1. Foster discussion about Open Data and
rights management issues
2. Develop library standards that are
compatible with Linked Data
3. Apply library experience in curation and
long-term preservation to Linked Open
Data
Take the Power Back
Let’s Talk.