The second of the three elements of Library 2.0 that I will be looking at will be the area of Flexibility. This post will focus on discussion of how libraries might make use of web2.0 technologies to allow their information services to be accessed in more flexible ways.

Technological Felixbility

Web 2.0, web mashups, AJAX, etc., [...] in my mind are all facets of the same phenomenon: that information and presentation are being separated in ways that allow for novel forms of reuse. - Sho Kuwamoto.

As Kuwamoto suggests, one of the most powerful and exciting common practices appearing in response to Web2.0 is the separation of content from presentation. This means that the locations which information can be deployed is increasingly less limited by the infrastructure which supports and stores it. Where in the past databases and integrated library systems were potentially tied to certain interfaces (such as proprietary OPAC user interfaces, for example). Library 2.0 sees librarians and library systems vendors attempting to think of ways to encourage the production of flexible application programming interfaces which could allow users to easily integrate library content into their own online applications and websites.

One good example is WPOpac developed by Casey Bisson. WPOpac uses the WordPress open source blog hosting system as a front end for the libraries catalogue. This allows the library to harness typical blog elements such as tags and comments to enhance user navigation and interpretation of bibliographic records. Additionally, as Jenny Levine points out, search engines can easily index the entire catalogue because each item has its own static, perma-link-able page. Jenny also highlights that, by choosing an open source product like WordPress “anyone who knows how to write a WordPress plugin can now enhance the OPAC—which suddenly opens the field to potentially thousands of new helpers.”

This increased separation between information and it’s presentation is an asset to libraries working to support a technologically advanced field such as game and interactive media development. By adopting broad and flexible standards they will be able to more readily adapt their services to interact with new user demands and emerging capabilities and requirements of developing technologies.

Culture of Change - the always-beta

Michael Casey, the person who coined the term “Library 2.0,” suggests in a recent alablog.org podcast that 2.0 Libraries should be founded on a culture of steady, ongoing, planned, and internalized change. Planning, preparing and being aware of change allows the library to be more flexible in responding to new challenges. Michael compares this to what he calls “discontinuous change” - long times of complacent lack of change punctuated by short periods of intense disruptive change. Libraries have often followed a strategic plan set up to span several years with a review of this plan only occasionally towards the end of each cycle. Michael suggests that this does not allow adequate time for the library to respond to changes happening in the environment that the library inhabits.

This attitude of constant change can be seen in most Web2.0 focused companies. As mentioned in my prievious post about the visibility goals for Library 2.0, these groups keep channels of communication with their users open and two way, and their products in beta in order to more readily and comfortably adapt to changing feedback from their market. A rather old post from Michael Casey’s blog LibraryCrunch seems to sum up the always-beta attitude well:

This, to me, is one of the definitions of Library 2.0 — harvesting ideas and products from peripheral fields that can then be integrated into library service models to improve existing services and create new services, and then continuing to examine and improve these services without being afraid to replace them at any time with newer and hopefully better services.

This is something that would be relevant to all libraries, not just to the kinds of libraries this research focuses on. Nonetheless, as an institution providing a service to a private college that trains participants in a extremely rapidly changing industry it would seem to be very important that libraries in this area be particularly aware of changing trends and keep structures in place that allow them to adapt flexibly to future challenges.