Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dinberg Donna]

Hi Jeff,

I just took a look at the draft statement.  It's a good start, and I like
that you made it clear and simple.

Under Purpose:  In the first sentence, within the parentheses, you might
mention "systems librarians" or "library analysts".  I could not
legitimately call myself any of the three technologist types listed, yet the
journal will be very much for folks like me who carry c4lib info into other
parts of our institutions.  As well, technologists who sit on the MLS side
of the technology, rather than the code side, should be mentioned
specifically to demonstrate the educational objective discussed earlier,
since we seem to have agreed that an aim is to encourage those not on the
code side to do some learning.  Otherwise, as mentioned before, it's coders
talking only to coders.

Something that needs to be included somewhere is a statement about rights
management, authors' rights, copyright/left, etc., written by someone with a
good understanding of Creative Commons licensing.  (I'm not the right person
to ask, or I would do a draft myself.)

Cheers.
Din.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** My own stuff above, as usual; not my employer's. **


> -Original Message-
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Davis, Jeffrey
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:15 PM
> To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal
>
> In an
> attempt to create a "node" for formal publication, I've put
> together the first draft of a formal statement of purpose,
> format, and editorial policies for a code4lib journal.  It's
> on the code4lib wiki:
>
>
http://wiki.library.oregonstate.edu/confluence/display/code4lib/code4lib+jou
rnal+-+mission%2C+format%2C+guidelines
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Davis, Jeffrey]

I really like Roy's idea of establishing "nodes of activity around
various ideas" coming out of this discussion.  In an attempt to create a
"node" for formal publication, I've put together the first draft of a
formal statement of purpose, format, and editorial policies for a
code4lib journal.  It's on the code4lib wiki:

http://wiki.library.oregonstate.edu/confluence/display/code4lib/code4lib
+journal+-+mission%2C+format%2C+guidelines

Please take a look and make changes or add comments -- I'm hoping this
process can be as open and democratic as the conference.  There's a lot
of room for building in some of the fantastic, innovative suggestions
that have come up over the past few days.  Alternatively, if you really
hate the idea of a formal publication, start another node for whatever
approach(es) you prefer.  The important thing is that we get people
engaged and get ideas out there.
--
Jeff Davis
Public Services Librarian
University of Alberta Libraries
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IM screen name: jd4v15 (MSN, AIM, Yahoo)



-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Roy Tennant
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 5:03 PM
To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

+1

I know there has been a lot of sentiment toward simply hacking on our
web site, but as useful as that might be, it is still preaching to
the choir. As Peter and others have said, if we want to broaden our
reach we will most likely need to produce something that will get
much wider notice -- that is, something more magazine or journal
like. A publication gets broader notice in ways that putting up
something on a web site doesn't. I'm not arguing against anything, I
think everyone should participate in what they feel is most useful.

Having said that, I know that creating a new publication is not
trivial. But it can also be done if enough people want to make it
happen. I've kept Current Cites going for almost sixteen years, with
a monthly publication deadline. A magazine is much more substantial,
but is also unlikely to be published on a monthly basis either.
Perhaps it's time to move beyond debate and simply allow folks to
coalesce around the activities that turn them on. Perhaps we could
use the web site or wiki to establish nodes of activity around
various ideas, and see who signs on/contributes?
Roy

On Feb 23, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Binkley, Peter wrote:

>> One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?"
>
> The more I think about it, the more I think the main justification
> for a
> code4lib journal is to get our stuff noticed more. There are too many
> enthusiastic Library 2.0 bloggers who spend their time talking about
> non-library Web 2.0 services, and asking why we don't do cool stuff
> like
> that in our libraries. They should pay more attention to the people
> who
> are actually building the tools to do that, i.e. us. So the journal
> should serve the forward-thinking library community as a whole.
>
> Peter
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Roy Tennant]

+1

I know there has been a lot of sentiment toward simply hacking on our
web site, but as useful as that might be, it is still preaching to
the choir. As Peter and others have said, if we want to broaden our
reach we will most likely need to produce something that will get
much wider notice -- that is, something more magazine or journal
like. A publication gets broader notice in ways that putting up
something on a web site doesn't. I'm not arguing against anything, I
think everyone should participate in what they feel is most useful.

Having said that, I know that creating a new publication is not
trivial. But it can also be done if enough people want to make it
happen. I've kept Current Cites going for almost sixteen years, with
a monthly publication deadline. A magazine is much more substantial,
but is also unlikely to be published on a monthly basis either.
Perhaps it's time to move beyond debate and simply allow folks to
coalesce around the activities that turn them on. Perhaps we could
use the web site or wiki to establish nodes of activity around
various ideas, and see who signs on/contributes?
Roy

On Feb 23, 2006, at 3:40 PM, Binkley, Peter wrote:


One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?"


The more I think about it, the more I think the main justification
for a
code4lib journal is to get our stuff noticed more. There are too many
enthusiastic Library 2.0 bloggers who spend their time talking about
non-library Web 2.0 services, and asking why we don't do cool stuff
like
that in our libraries. They should pay more attention to the people
who
are actually building the tools to do that, i.e. us. So the journal
should serve the forward-thinking library community as a whole.

Peter

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Binkley, Peter]

> One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?"

The more I think about it, the more I think the main justification for a
code4lib journal is to get our stuff noticed more. There are too many
enthusiastic Library 2.0 bloggers who spend their time talking about
non-library Web 2.0 services, and asking why we don't do cool stuff like
that in our libraries. They should pay more attention to the people who
are actually building the tools to do that, i.e. us. So the journal
should serve the forward-thinking library community as a whole.

Peter

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Shaun Ellis]

Hi folks... been trying to follow this thread... I've been quite busy
this week:

I think that for libraries to keep pace with our private sector
competitors, there needs to be strong alliances made on the technology
side.  In my opinion, the journal being proposed should focus on
encouraging collaboration and sharing of resources amongst libraries.
This list is already a place where folks collaborate and present their
solutions and questions, so it's a great place to harvest and nominate
authors and topics.

Ross Singer asks:
/One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?" (which has
already been asked, but I don't know if we've gotten consensus on it). /

When I think of a journal, I think of scholarly articles/theory which
address the big picture when it comes to the technological direction of
libraries.  If this is the case, the audience would not only be members
of this list but possibly those who make big administrative and budget
decisions in the area of technology as well.  Furthermore, librarians
with non-technical backgrounds could be inspired by how technology is
being (or might be) applied to their areas of study.  Basically, what
I'm saying is that I think it depends on how specialized and "geeky"
people want to make this, but I would argue that it would best serve as
a bridge to take our ideas out of geekdom and into an more scholarly
analysis of applied solutions (or failures).  By focusing on the big
picture, the journal would also garner a larger audience and hold
greater authority as a scholarly publication.

Ross Singer asks:
/I think a more important question, however, is "What is it about
Code4Lib that attracts you/makes you desire a published output of it?" /

If we're just talking about a codebank, discussion forum, and
non-scholarly article reference, then I see that as more of an active
online community, not a journal.  I think a lot of the code hacks have a
perfect audience right here on this list and see no reason to change the
format, which would inevitably make it more formal.  But those hacks are
often created to put out fires and solve an isolated problem for one
library, not necessarily deal with the "elephants in the room" that we
all face.

By the way, I think Ross has an interesting article topic right there in
his email.  What elements of an IRC channel creates more of a sense of
community than a listserv?  How could we use IRC to solve
library-specific problems?

-Shaun

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Bess Sadler]

On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:09 AM, Ross Singer wrote:


I think a more important question, however, is "What is it about
Code4Lib that attracts you/makes you desire a published output of it?"




I believe that Code4Lib serves an otherwise under-served audience:
The growing numbers of librarians who are also sys-admins /
programmers / general geeks. I rarely find anything in the library
journals that applies to what I do. I try to keep up with the open
source press as well, but almost never do I see anything there that
directly addresses libraries. My main source of information directly
relevant to my job is reading the blogs of code4lib members.
Unfortunately, when I need to make a budget request or ask my library
to think about trying something new "this guy's blog said it was
cool" doesn't carry as much weight as I might wish.

Librarians are increasingly being asked to be hackers. "We don't have
the budget to call in a consultant... see if you can get it working
anyway." Or ... "People are asking for RSS feeds from our OPAC, but
the upgrade that provides that won't be out for a year / doesn't work
with our system / costs too much... can you get it working anyway?"
Or, best of all... "Here' s a project that could easily consume a
full-time software engineering design team. But we really need it!
Can you give it a shot?"

This is not a complaint. I love my job, and I love what I do. But I,
and the people I work with, rely almost entirely on informal
information networks at this point: book recommendations, blog
postings, the occasional conference. I can't help but think that I'm
missing a lot, that many people are missing even more, and that we
need some sort of systematized information distribution that
addresses all the things that have been raised in this forum, as well
as:

1. Is it worth it to pick up a new programming language like Ruby /
flavor of the month?
2. How do I trick my OPAC into doing cool stuff?
3. How do I hire a library geek?
4. How do I mentor non-geeks into becoming geeks?
5. How can I pick up a crash course in software engineering, for
those times when I need to design an application from scratch? Are
there some design tools that might help this process?

I can come up with many other questions, but you get the idea. I
think blogs are fantastic, and I love #code4lib even though I rarely
participate anymore, but I think we have more than enough material,
and more than enough audience, to justify a journal. More than that,
I think the emerging field of hacker librarianship needs such a
journal if it is going to grow.

Bess


Elizabeth (Bess) Sadler
Metadata Specialist for User Projects

Digital Research and Instructional Services (DRIS)
Box 400129
Alderman Library
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, VA 22904

[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(434) 243-2305

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Casey Bisson]

Ross++

the less formal, the better.


On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:09 AM, Ross Singer wrote:


I think we're down to some real questions here.

One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?" (which has
already been asked, but I don't know if we've gotten consensus on it).

I think a more important question, however, is "What is it about
Code4Lib that attracts you/makes you desire a published output of it?"

We had ~85 people in Corvallis (at various times).  What peaked their
interest?  Was it the "established community"?  The potential of
meeting
with like minded geeks?  The hope for a professional organization that
speaks their language?

The question of "what is your perception of 'Code4Lib'?" needs to be
addressed.

I guess since I raise the question, I should be the first to answer.

I view Code4Lib as an informal community of developers that combine
wits
to solve real and perceived problems happening in libraries.  I
like its
lack of "professional tone" - it was less intimidating to participate
that way.

I also note that I didn't start thinking of Code4Lib as "community"
until I entered the IRC channel.  The mailing list didn't instill me
with that connection (although I still found it useful).  I don't
think
#code4lib == Code4Lib, but I'm not sure you'd see the current energy
around the community without it.

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Ross Singer]

I think we're down to some real questions here.

One question is certainly, "Who will this journal serve?" (which has
already been asked, but I don't know if we've gotten consensus on it).

I think a more important question, however, is "What is it about
Code4Lib that attracts you/makes you desire a published output of it?"

We had ~85 people in Corvallis (at various times).  What peaked their
interest?  Was it the "established community"?  The potential of meeting
with like minded geeks?  The hope for a professional organization that
speaks their language?

The question of "what is your perception of 'Code4Lib'?" needs to be
addressed.

I guess since I raise the question, I should be the first to answer.

I view Code4Lib as an informal community of developers that combine wits
to solve real and perceived problems happening in libraries.  I like its
lack of "professional tone" - it was less intimidating to participate
that way.

I also note that I didn't start thinking of Code4Lib as "community"
until I entered the IRC channel.  The mailing list didn't instill me
with that connection (although I still found it useful).  I don't think
#code4lib == Code4Lib, but I'm not sure you'd see the current energy
around the community without it.

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dinberg Donna]

Just an observation re one of Art's statements:

> TPMDP #5: A spin-off "traditional" publication would still be
> possible downstream. A lot of people only want to find out
> more about the innards of a project after seeing its final
> results, so nothing precludes a more neatly packaged version
> at some point in the process and, in fact, this is where a
> lot of this would lead. But they key to me is that the messy
> "bits" would also be available if there was interest.

This would capture audience at both ends.  At the messy end, coders want
like-minded folks to join in with a flow of discussion, comment, additions,
suggestions, etc.  At the other end, folks like me (although I watch the
coder bit, too) and possibly those who "don't watch" (as I defined earlier)
will gain from formal, organized, bring-it-all-together presentations.

You will need to define the formal end to make it distinct from the messy
development stuff.  Art implies that not all messy stuff will have formal
end-points; I agree with that.  If downstream publication (within code4lib)
is accepted as part of this proposal, though, then those participating will
need a few "rules for authors" written to guide both coders who have worked
through messy stuff first and those who wish to make submissions that do not
or will not have messy-code components.  This will provide consistency in
the formal presentations that a journal ought to have and that audiences
expect.

Din. (editor and journalist in a past life)

Donna Dinberg
Systems Librarian/Analyst
Reference and Genealogy Division
Library and Archives Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** My own thoughts, of course, not those of my employer. **

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Eric Hellman]

I am probably the only one on this list who has actually started a
journal and followed through on it, built an organization, obtained
sponsorship, built a technical infrastructure, and produced a few
hundred papers. There has never been a sane person who has done that
twice.

Observations:
1. Starting a journal is very hard work.
2. No journal has ever succeeded due to "innovative features".
3. The library community is good at cataloging and archiving content.
4. The code4lib community, using its current apparatus, is good at
commenting on and refining ideas.
5. This is one of those ideas.
6. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

So here's my problem statement:

What is the smallest, cheapest and least invasive tweak on Code4Lib's
current apparatus that would satisfy the needs expressed in the
current thread of the Code4Lib listserv??

Suggested answer- find a way to identify, catalog and archive (see #3
above) important, significant, or useful threads from the Code4Lib
listserv, then call the result the Code4Lib journal.

identification- simple slashdot style voting - a threshold of +5
(initiator can't vote)
archiving- D-space? + LOCKSS?
cataloguing- no idea occurs to me at the moment.

self-referential proposal: This thread should be:
"A code4lib journal proposal"  Jeffery Davis, et.al., Code4Lib
Journal, Vol. 2006, Article 1.

Potential problems:
 forked threads
 meandering threads
 open "authorship"
 inappropriate "titles"
 participation by bots

Eric


--

Eric Hellman, DirectorOCLC Openly
Informatics Division
[EMAIL PROTECTED]2 Broad St., Suite 208
tel 1-973-509-7800 fax 1-734-468-6216  Bloomfield, NJ 07003
http://www.openly.com/1cate/  1 Click Access To Everything

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Art Rhyno]

Wow, lots of great ideas coming in on this. I wonder if fleshing out a
test case would be useful for the class of materials that might have
trouble finding a home in standard publications. For example, Roy's
MODS<->MPEG DIDL shootout. Let's say that Roy put a digitized book on the
code4lib server (maybe one of his own :-), and enough descriptive metadata
to kick things off. Roy then challenges the world to do something
impressive with the results, maybe directly contacting some MODS and DIDL
folks. Those of you who have ever seen Sun's blueprints know that this is
sort of the intent behind their blueprint series, define what seems to be
a agreed-upon problem and let the "best of breed" solutions emerge.

So far, any of this could happen in either the lead-up to a traditional
article (groundwork for "a comparison of MODS and MPEG DIDL") or this kind
of task could be described and offered out on any blog. Now a group like
the folks working on Evergreen do a heck of a lot with MODS and maybe they
decide to take up the banner for it. This leads to the first of a couple
of TPMDPs (Traditional Publishing Model Departure Point):

TPMDP #1: Some sort of step by step capturing mechanism kicks in for
recording how the Evergreen folks approach the task and start to build a
solution. Maybe something as low barrier as a link to their development
blog. This needs to be unobtrusive but is an important layer. It always
looks like divine design after a solution is presented, and Roy's right
that no one ever wants to talk about the wrong turns they make in the path
to a solution, but these are often the most instructive parts.

TPMDP #2: A level of comments is made available for each step of the
process. Peter's noted that comments are really hard to do well, and it
would be great if this could be done in some sort of threaded RSS model.
Jon Udell once wrote about a researcher trying to model network events as
chirping sounds so that someone monitoring hundreds of systems would
instantly notice when something was astray, and be able to instantly grasp
which system it was by the chirp that had changed. So maybe  we need a
comment chirp plugin or something, but the smart money is still on an RSS
comments feed for now. Still, it would be nice to see if comments could be
layered in more elegantly than they usually are.

TPMDP #3: An IRC bridge is made available. I once wrote a hook for IRC to
snag insults from a supybot in cocoon so that a dynamic bit of content
could appear in an S5 slide. I didn't realize until afterwards that
supybots often have incredibly foul mouths and didn't do much with the
results, but I am convinced there is something in the conversational model
in IRC that could do a lot in other spaces. The koha folks do town halls
with IRC, what if an article, or story posting, or whatever this thing is,
shows who is online in code4lib and has some sort of entry point into the
channel with a nick like "reader_wants_to_talk_about_shootout" or
something similar? Or maybe the posting itself is some sort of bot that
can be asked to record parts of discussion? Maybe there could be some sort
of scheduling mechanism, so that someone could say "discuss this solution
with the creators at 10 am on Tuesday" and a log of the discussion could
be kept with the posting. Panizzi, Ed Summers' bot, could probably be
convinced to do something like this.

TPMDP #4: Some sort of presentation tools are always an option. Most
projects have a point where you want to get some feedback before you
proceed further or you suspect a quick reality check might save you grief
later on. Again, this would have to be extremely low barrier, but it would
be invaluable in understanding the information flow and final direction
within a project.

TPMDP #5: A spin-off "traditional" publication would still be possible
downstream. A lot of people only want to find out more about the innards
of a project after seeing its final results, so nothing precludes a more
neatly packaged version at some point in the process and, in fact, this is
where a lot of this would lead. But they key to me is that the messy
"bits" would also be available if there was interest.

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Jeremy Frumkin]

*gasp* - related communities working together. Perish the thought!

+1

-- jaf


On 2/22/06 4:24 PM, "Binkley, Peter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Perhaps an explicit connection with Access and Code4LibCon would make
> sense; the journal could provide a home for the presentations at those
> conferences, worked up into article format. If even a third of the
> presentations made it into the journal, that would fill two issues a
> year. (If we could connect to equivalent Australian and British
> conferences, we'd be set for a quarterly).
>
> Peter
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
>> Behalf Of NCR Lab
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 03:56 PM
>> To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal
>>
>> O.K., I'm jumping into this a little late (I have a day job
>> {:-)  ), so if I missed something in this long series of
>> posts, use the delete button.
>>
>> I am excited about the prospect of a "journal;" enough to be
>> willing to commit time to it.  I'm reminded of an eLiteracy
>> conference I went to a few years ago.  It's an annual thing
>> now, but this was only the second or third conference they
>> had.  They decided that year to have a journal,
>> JeLit<http://www.jelit.org/>(
>> www.*jelit*.org/) and invited all who had presented to submit
>> their projects/presentations.  The journal is entirely
>> electronic, and, I believe, includes submissions other than
>> conference material.  There is also a review process.  We
>> might want to do something like that?
>>
>> Carol Bean
>> Computer Center Manager
>> North County Regional Library
>> Palm Beach County Library System
>> 11303 Campus Dr.
>> Palm Beach Gardens, FL  33410
>>

-- jaf

===
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-4501

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes nothing. "
- Emerson

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Binkley, Peter]

Perhaps an explicit connection with Access and Code4LibCon would make
sense; the journal could provide a home for the presentations at those
conferences, worked up into article format. If even a third of the
presentations made it into the journal, that would fill two issues a
year. (If we could connect to equivalent Australian and British
conferences, we'd be set for a quarterly).

Peter

> -Original Message-
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of NCR Lab
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 03:56 PM
> To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal
>
> O.K., I'm jumping into this a little late (I have a day job
> {:-)  ), so if I missed something in this long series of
> posts, use the delete button.
>
> I am excited about the prospect of a "journal;" enough to be
> willing to commit time to it.  I'm reminded of an eLiteracy
> conference I went to a few years ago.  It's an annual thing
> now, but this was only the second or third conference they
> had.  They decided that year to have a journal,
> JeLit<http://www.jelit.org/>(
> www.*jelit*.org/) and invited all who had presented to submit
> their projects/presentations.  The journal is entirely
> electronic, and, I believe, includes submissions other than
> conference material.  There is also a review process.  We
> might want to do something like that?
>
> Carol Bean
> Computer Center Manager
> North County Regional Library
> Palm Beach County Library System
> 11303 Campus Dr.
> Palm Beach Gardens, FL  33410
>

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[NCR Lab]

O.K., I'm jumping into this a little late (I have a day job {:-)  ), so if I
missed something in this long series of posts, use the delete button.

I am excited about the prospect of a "journal;" enough to be willing to
commit time to it.  I'm reminded of an eLiteracy conference I went to a few
years ago.  It's an annual thing now, but this was only the second or third
conference they had.  They decided that year to have a journal,
JeLit(
www.*jelit*.org/) and invited all who had presented to submit their
projects/presentations.  The journal is entirely electronic, and, I believe,
includes submissions other than conference material.  There is also a review
process.  We might want to do something like that?

Carol Bean
Computer Center Manager
North County Regional Library
Palm Beach County Library System
11303 Campus Dr.
Palm Beach Gardens, FL  33410

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Colleen Whitney]

I've lurked on this list for some time...but I must chime in here for a
moment.  I think that the following two statements go back to an earlier
post by Dorothea Salo today, which really summed it up nicely for me as
a lurker who hasn't been very involved in this community:


* The core audience for the journal would be the more-or-less-hardcore
coders and developers, plus any "accidental techs" willing to
participate in hardcore-type conversations.




<...>


* The journal MUST reach out to people beyond the current code4lib
community.  Several people have said this is a good argument in favor of
a more formal structure.



It comes down to the goals of the group, and I'm not sure that it's a
question of whether the proposed journal is formal vs. informal in
structure.  If libraries are to move forward technically, then there is
a need to attract people from outside the libraries who have the right
skills, and to help "accidental techies" who are on the periphery within
the libraries build their skills.

So if the goal of the group is to move libraries forward technically,
then the real need is to create a welcoming atmosphere that draws
outsiders in.   That's really hard to do, especially when you've got a
solid and active core group, like this one does, that has gelled over
time and has developed in jokes and ways of thinking and communicating.
That's not an inherently bad thing necessarily, but it does raise
(probably unintentional) barriers to newcomers.

If, on the other hand, the goal is to enjoy a social network among
like-minded guys in the profession, then the status quo is fine, but the
group should not be surprised if this fails to attract new people.

Cheers,

--Colleen

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Davis, Jeffrey]

A few thoughts, followed by a summary of the discussion so far.

Ed Corrado noted some problems with peer review in an earlier message,
and I think those problems outweigh the gains of peer review -- which
ultimately amount to a little more respectability, mainly for those
seeking tenure.  In that light, I like the open review process idea
suggested by Ed and Peter Binkley (editors vet the article; it's made
"available for public comment" for a limited period, perhaps in a wiki;
the author revises the article based on the comments; and the final
version gets published in a subsequent issue).  Of course, this would
require commitment to comment/review from the larger community --
hopefully not just current code4lib folks, either -- but I think we can
pull that one off.  If necessary, we could even have a designated,
rotating group of reviewers/commenters ("peer review lite"?).  You
should also be able to post anonymous comments, for the same reason that
peer reviewers are usually not identified.

Regarding whether to publish as a formal journal: Some people on the
list and in-channel have expressed reservations about issuing all the
articles as issues (i.e. in regular chunks rather than as they are
written).  But there's no reason we couldn't publish finalized articles
early, as "pre-releases" between issues, just so long as the final
version eventually gets published as part of a regular issue.  In fact,
this would dovetail nicely with the editorial process described above.
One approach would be to have a regular publication schedule with its
own "official release" RSS feed, while any articles that are finalized
before publication can also be released early via a separate "as-ready"
feed.

More generally, I think there are good arguments for having an ISSN,
regular publication, and an established review process with clear and
public editorial policies (whatever the process itself might be).  These
things lend legitimacy and authority to the project, and those are good
qualities that we want to have.

***

To add to Peter Binkley's summary of the emerging consensus, I think
we've also agreed on the following:

* The core audience for the journal would be the more-or-less-hardcore
coders and developers, plus any "accidental techs" willing to
participate in hardcore-type conversations.

* The emphasis would be on the practical, with actual code and specific
solutions to problems -- as Eric Lease Morgan says, "code snippets,
hacks, Javascript widgets & gadgets, etc."  This could be balanced by
some higher-level "feature articles" as well.

* Comments would be enabled on all articles.  Dorothea Salo's "I tried
this and it
worked!" button would complement this nicely.

* The journal MUST reach out to people beyond the current code4lib
community.  Several people have said this is a good argument in favor of
a more formal structure.

* There has to be a low barrier to participation.  I think the shorter
articles can serve this function, since they would have a fairly simple
editorial process.  It needn't be much more difficult than writing a
substantial, rigorous blog post.  The editors could even solicit
articles from bloggers ("Hey, that post was interesting -- want to get
it published?").

* Several people have offered to host the journal at their institutions
using Open Journal Systems.  If we want to be more informal or
experimental than OJS will allow, the existing code4lib.org site would
be a natural home.

--
Jeff Davis
Public Services Librarian
University of Alberta Libraries
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IM screen name: jd4v15 (MSN, AIM, Yahoo)





-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Binkley, Peter
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 11:38 AM
To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

I agree with Ed Corrado that the purpose of the peer-review process is
to improve the articles, not to give thumbs-up or thumbs-down. How about
making the review process consist of submitting an article into a wiki
(with proper discussion page etc.) and letting it simmer there for a
while before moving it to the more formal journal area?

I think getting the dynamic-content part right will be the hard part.
I'm always frustrated by the problem of comments in blogs: often they're
as important as the postings, but how do you track them? Subscribe to a
separate comments RSS feed (as you have to do on my blog)? Have the main
entry appear as new in the main RSS feed every time someone posts a
comment (as Art's blog does, I believe)? Neither of these really gets me
engaged with the discussion the way I (sometimes) want to be. If the
journal is going to be truly edgy, we need a better solution than
anything I've run into.

We seem to be forming a consensus that the journal would consist 

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Beata Frelas]

Sounds like a 'journal - portal - knowledge base' type-o-thing

Whatever it will be, I KNOW it will be Bit-e-full!

Beata

Eric Lease Morgan wrote:


On Feb 22, 2006, at 8:03 AM, Dinberg Donna wrote:


Last night I pulled the first 3 issues of JOLA (yeah, I go back
that far)
from my shelf and took a look.  Back in the late '60s, JOLA was
reproducing
images of Hollerith cards, tractor-feed print dumps, flowcharts, and
formulae to illustrate some pretty detailed articles about really
tech-y
stuff pertaining to the mainframe environment in libraries.
Compared to
today's ITAL, the early JOLA was deeper into the guts of library code
development.

You are proposing to go back to that?  I say, Yes!




Me too.

I am looking for code snippets, hacks, Javascript widgets & gadgets,
etc. I believe the inclusion of these sorts of things will set this
journal off from the others. Think of writing code as a sort of
poetry, and this journal is a poetry journal.  ;-)

--
Eric Lease Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame



--
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact.
Everything we hear is a perspective, not the truth.

  - Marcus Aurelius
Beata Frelas
Technical Support Consultant/Analyst
L002A Mahaffey Business Information Center
Notre Dame, IN  46556

Phone:  (574) 631-7176
Fax:(574) 631-6367
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web:http://www.nd.edu/~bfrelas

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Binkley, Peter]

I agree with Ed Corrado that the purpose of the peer-review process is
to improve the articles, not to give thumbs-up or thumbs-down. How about
making the review process consist of submitting an article into a wiki
(with proper discussion page etc.) and letting it simmer there for a
while before moving it to the more formal journal area?

I think getting the dynamic-content part right will be the hard part.
I'm always frustrated by the problem of comments in blogs: often they're
as important as the postings, but how do you track them? Subscribe to a
separate comments RSS feed (as you have to do on my blog)? Have the main
entry appear as new in the main RSS feed every time someone posts a
comment (as Art's blog does, I believe)? Neither of these really gets me
engaged with the discussion the way I (sometimes) want to be. If the
journal is going to be truly edgy, we need a better solution than
anything I've run into.

We seem to be forming a consensus that the journal would consist of
different things, including:

1) formal articles, things that might otherwise have gone to D-Lib or
Ariadne

2) short how-tos / lessons learned pieces, like lightning talks, ideally
sparking a string of comments and additions like Art's shepherd's pie
recipes

3) hacks: actual code

How about demos? Should we aim to have the server-side capacity and
facilities to actually show new stuff in operation? A lot of this would
have a limited shelf-life (in that we wouldn't undertake to maintain the
code), but it would be nice to have a single place where you could see
some eye-candy.

Peter


Peter Binkley
Digital Initiatives Technology Librarian
Information Technology Services
4-30 Cameron Library
University of Alberta Libraries
Edmonton, Alberta
Canada T6G 2J8
Phone: (780) 492-3743
Fax: (780) 492-9243
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Michael J. Giarlo]

A gin-u-wine levity injection:

On 2/22/06, Jeremy Frumkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of
> Insect
> Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of Wisconsin).


This model would really -bug- me.

I'll be here all week, folks.

-Mike

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Mark Jordan]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:44:08AM -0800, Jeremy Frumkin wrote:
> Ross unleashed:
>
> >>
> > Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
> >
> > I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then
> > nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then one
> > comes out every day for a 13 day span.
> >
> > If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
> > intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
> > bother with a formal schedule?
> >
> > -Ross.
>
>
> While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of Insect
> Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of Wisconsin).
> While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to produce
> actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
> through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at the end
> of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
> bound.
>
> The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a hearty +1
>
>

As for hybrid models, take a look at 
http://copyrightjournal.org/index.php/Copyright, which has a "journal
club" (http://www.copyrightjournal.org/drupal/forum/7). This journal, with 
names like Lawrence Lessig as
editors, uses OJS, Drupal, and MediaWiki on one site.

Again, this is not an arguement for using any particular platform, but it's 
interesting to see how another
site mashes things up.

Mark


Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Phone (604) 291 5753 / Fax (604) 291 3023
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.sfu.ca/~mjordan/

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Mark Jordan]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:14:18AM -0800, K.G. Schneider wrote:

>
> You also need a production schedule, a team of peer reviewers, publication
> guidelines, and editorial policies. This does not have to take forever.
> Frankly, in most typical LibraryLand settings it would take two years, maybe
> longer, but an afternoon of skyping and IM'ing among you folks should wrap
> things up pretty well.
>

Yeah, those things are certainly needed if the journal is following the 
conventional blind peer review
process. The benefit of Open Journal Systems (or the other conventional open 
source journal publishing
platforms) is that it provides the workflow tools required to pull these 
requirements off.  If anyone's
interested, see page 12 of OJS in an Hour 
(http://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/OJSinanHour.pdf).

Maybe not relevant to the journal being currently proposed, but
http://drexel-coas-elearning.blogspot.com/2006/02/peer-review-in-google-age.html
 is worth reading anyway.

Mark


Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Phone (604) 291 5753 / Fax (604) 291 3023
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.sfu.ca/~mjordan/

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Andrew Darby]

I like Ben's suggestion of A List Apart as a model:  timely practical
articles that can still be read a year later; excellent layout and
presentation (and thus, "authority"); active discussion attached to each
article, sometimes with additional valuable ideas/info; issues and a
schedule (but a bit irregular, I think).

As someone noted, a journal only makes sense if you want to get beyond
the IRC/planet Code4Lib circle of people; otherwise, the tools are
already in place, and maybe you just need a means of archiving and
searching what's already there.

And if you want to reach others outside this inner circle (but without,
say, pandering or dumbing things down), you'll probably have more
success with a bit of structure and "editorial consciousness."
Otherwise, any outside readers might dismiss it as a short-lived vanity
project, or another blog, or view the content as suspect.  Ditto any
prospective employers authors might someday want to impress . . . .

And, as K. G. S. suggested, having at least some of the apparatus of a
"proper journal" would ensure that it actually comes out and doesn't
fizz away into a "boy, that was a good idea, [why didn't it ever happen
/ why did it only last two issues]?"

Which isn't to say it couldn't be some sort of hybrid, with an edited
featured article/tip/trick or three, + some [insert new idea here].

My (perhaps redundant) few cents.

Andrew

Ben Brophy wrote:



http://www.alistapart.com/ might be a good model. They are formal
enough to have issue numbers, an ISSN number and an editorial board,
but not too formal.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Edward Corrado]

Jeremy Frumkin said the following on 2/22/2006 11:44 AM:


Ross unleashed:




Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?

I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then
nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then one
comes out every day for a 13 day span.

If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
bother with a formal schedule?

-Ross.





While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of Insect
Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of Wisconsin).
While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to produce
actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at the end
of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
bound.

The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a hearty +1




I like the idea of taking a similar approach to what Jeremy describes
the Journal of Insect Science as taking. I think it would be good to
publish articles as they are approved, and then either once or twice a
year (depending on the number of submissions), package them all as one
volume.

Ed C.




-- jaf

===
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-4501

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes nothing. "
- Emerson

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Mark Jordan]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 08:44:08AM -0800, Jeremy Frumkin wrote:
> Ross unleashed:
>
> >>
> > Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
> >
> > I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then
> > nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then one
> > comes out every day for a 13 day span.
> >
> > If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
> > intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
> > bother with a formal schedule?
> >
> > -Ross.
>
>
> While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of Insect
> Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of Wisconsin).
> While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to produce
> actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
> through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at the end
> of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
> bound.
>
> The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a hearty +1
>

Actually, in its next version Open Journal Systems will have a feature for 
releasing articles between issues,
something which has been commmon in some scientific disciplines for a long 
time. I'm not necessarily
advocating OJS, just saying what Ross is suggesting is par for the course.

Mark

Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Phone (604) 291 5753 / Fax (604) 291 3023
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.sfu.ca/~mjordan/

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Roy Tennant]

Publishing articles as they are ready is fine, but as Karen alluded
to, the issue paradigm is as much about whipping authors/editor into
action and creating an event worthy of notice (a collection of
articles becoming available not just one) as it is making a printable/
shippable package. There are real reasons why the idea of issues work
beyond the print metaphor and we would do well to understand that
before chucking it. Having said all that, if we believe the idea of
issues has no use or relevance to this effort, then so be it. Let's
just do it with our eyes wide open as to the possible consequences.
Roy

On Feb 22, 2006, at 8:44 AM, Jeremy Frumkin wrote:


Ross unleashed:




Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?

I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week,
then
nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and
then one
comes out every day for a 13 day span.

If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that
the
intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
bother with a formal schedule?

-Ross.



While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal
of Insect
Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of
Wisconsin).
While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to
produce
actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at
the end
of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
bound.

The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a
hearty +1


-- jaf

===
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-4501

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes
nothing. "
- Emerson

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Sperr, Edwin]

This is also the approach taken by the BioMed Central journals
<http://www.biomedcentral.com/>

-Ed

-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Jeremy Frumkin
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 11:44 AM
To: CODE4LIB@listserv.nd.edu
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

Ross unleashed:

>>
> Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
>
> I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then

> nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then
> one comes out every day for a 13 day span.
>
> If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the

> intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
> bother with a formal schedule?
>
> -Ross.


While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of
Insect Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of
Wisconsin).
While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to
produce actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully
vetted through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity,
at the end of each year we would print out all of the articles and have
them hard bound.

The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a hearty +1


-- jaf

===
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University Corvallis OR 97331-4501

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes
nothing. "
- Emerson

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Jeremy Frumkin]

Ross unleashed:

>>
> Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?
>
> I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then
> nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then one
> comes out every day for a 13 day span.
>
> If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
> intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
> bother with a formal schedule?
>
> -Ross.


While I was at the University of Arizona, we produced the Journal of Insect
Science (http://insectscience.org) (now at the University of Wisconsin).
While this is a peer reviewed journal, it took the approach not to produce
actual "issues", but to publish articles once they successfully vetted
through the peer review process. For preservation and posterity, at the end
of each year we would print out all of the articles and have them hard
bound.

The point is, Ross' suggestion is a good one, and I give it a hearty +1


-- jaf

===
Jeremy Frumkin
The Gray Chair for Innovative Library Services
121 The Valley Library, Oregon State University
Corvallis OR 97331-4501

[EMAIL PROTECTED]

541.737.9928
541.737.3453 (Fax)
541.230.4483 (Cell)
===
" Without ambition one starts nothing. Without work one finishes nothing. "
- Emerson

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[K.G. Schneider]

> If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
> intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
> bother with a formal schedule?
>
> -Ross.

Because that's how things get written, reviewed, and published. It's not for
Them, it's for You. Just my 2 cents as a writer.

K.G. Schneider

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Ross Singer]

K.G. Schneider wrote:


You could use blogging software to deliver it, but make sure it has peer
review, an ISSN, and a professional appearance.







Frankly, my concern (I hear the tape drives whirring faster as I think about
this) is that you have rushed out of the gate of a conference with great
enthusiasm and then something will happen and the journal will not happen.
You might consider, instead of attempting a regular publication, the online
version of a conference monograph, with everyone tackling specific topics
and the target date to be... let's see, a few weeks prior to Access. Two
publications a year might be reasonable. Or, new-tyme-style, perhaps one
great article a month, leading up to the Northern version of the conference.



Why does it have to follow /any/ traditional publishing model?

I sort of like the idea that maybe 3 articles come out in a week, then
nothing for a week or two, then another article comes out, and then one
comes out every day for a 13 day span.

If the delivery method is purely electronic, and it's a given that the
intended audience would have tools to be alerted of new articles, why
bother with a formal schedule?

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dinberg Donna]

Responding to Mark Jordan:

> but I don't think that audience should be the people you
> describe above (who a colleague of mine calls "analogue
> librarians"). If there are any accidental techs (or potential
> accidental techs) who aren't already hanging out on venues
> like what code4lib already is (i.e., oss4lib, /usr/lib/info,
> and a host of email lists, IRC channels, and tech blogs,
> inside and outside of library land) then they'll probably
> remain happy with thumbing through the existing diluted
> journals that librarianship is plagued with, and also remain
> happy with the delusion (pardon me for saying so) that they
> are keeping up on what's happening out in the world by reading them.

There are (a whole lotta?) folks out here who don't peruse *anything* we pay
attention to, but who still produce code in libraries.  There are various
reasons why they don't watch: no time, stuff of interest is too scattered,
1.0-level coder, etc.  When I commented that those of us lurking here funnel
stuff back into our (and maybe other) institutions, I was thinking
specifically of funneling to those who do not watch.

(Not watching is not new.  Decades ago, I mentioned an article on
experimental "bubble" memory to a senior and respected programmer; the
response was basically "Huh?".  For those of you born after bubble memory
peaked: http://www.xs4all.nl/~fjkraan/comp/pc5000/bubble.html )

This might be the value of the formal aspect of a code4lib magazine or
journal.  Those who do not watch blogs, websites, etc. might spend more time
on something more formal when a citation is plunked under their noses.  And,
they may find a peer group.

Din.

Donna Dinberg
Systems Librarian/Analyst
Reference and Genealogy Division
Library and Archives Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** My own thoughts, of course, not those of my employer. **

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[K.G. Schneider]

> Sorry if I've misinterpreted your argument, but aiming code4lib at the
> hard core is an
> opportunity that we shouldn't miss.

I am more analog than most of you (or at least partially powered by
tape-drives, or possibly those great clanking machines from Desk Set) but I
fully agree with this. There are enough publications that labor to explain
technology to the people like me who somewhat "get it," and for the rest,
there's Newsweek. The closest we get to what you're talking about, I think,
is DLib, ITAL, and First Monday. I see these all being rigorous but focused
in other places than "the code." Yours would be a boutique publication, but,
given the Long Tail and all that, properly done, it would work.

> I think the success of the conference
> (which I admit I
> didn't attend but have heard nothing but good things about) validates
> that. BUT, if the
> journal is to be taken seriously, particularly by promotion and tenure
> committees, then it
> does have to be peer reviewed and have some  _semblance_ of
> conventionality.

You could use blogging software to deliver it, but make sure it has peer
review, an ISSN, and a professional appearance.

This is where as a half-analog (or analogue--I like that even better) I'll
step in to say that if you produce it olde-tyme-style, as some kludgey
website or as some honking big long PDF, you will not gain audience, and you
will lose some street cred. As it stands--and please don't take this
personally--Planet Code4Lib, though interesting reading, as a design
experience is, um, a tad rustic, with the kind of gaffes typical of people
who are code-smart but maybe less far along in the social-software dept. But
at least it's online.

You also need a production schedule, a team of peer reviewers, publication
guidelines, and editorial policies. This does not have to take forever.
Frankly, in most typical LibraryLand settings it would take two years, maybe
longer, but an afternoon of skyping and IM'ing among you folks should wrap
things up pretty well.

I was glad to hear about the IRC backchannel. I go to conferences outside
LibraryLand quite a bit and this (or IM backchannels) has become routine,
and not just among the digirati, and yet is treated as outlandishly alien
within ALA, and I don't mean just PLA et al. You definitely get it on how
people do conferences elsewhere.

Frankly, my concern (I hear the tape drives whirring faster as I think about
this) is that you have rushed out of the gate of a conference with great
enthusiasm and then something will happen and the journal will not happen.
You might consider, instead of attempting a regular publication, the online
version of a conference monograph, with everyone tackling specific topics
and the target date to be... let's see, a few weeks prior to Access. Two
publications a year might be reasonable. Or, new-tyme-style, perhaps one
great article a month, leading up to the Northern version of the conference.

Just a thought, so that the sheer daunting nature of the challenge of
putting out a periodic publication doesn't sag under its own weight, once
the post-conference adrenaline burns off.

K.G. Schneider
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Art Rhyno]

Wow, there's been so many good posts on this that I am still digesting
them, but to answer Mark:

>Art, would creating a section at http://code4lib.org/ that was reserved
for formal, maybe even
>peer-reviewed articles do what you're describing?

This sounds like the right approach, and I am a big fan of drupal (and OJS
for that matter, but you are right, I don't think we are looking at a
traditional publishing model). Two functions I wonder about is some sort
of IRC hook and some facility for whiteboarding. I am thinking of a way to
capture some IRC discussion around a post or something like that. I am not
sure what the state of the air is for whiteboarding at this point, but it
would be nice to have this kind of option if it's possible.

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Mark Jordan]

On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 09:41:37AM -0500, Dorothea Salo wrote:

> It also means that Muhammad will have to go talk to the mountain. In
> librarianship terms, that means conferences (which code4lib has already
> pulled off), and a journal or something very like it. For all the violent
> "Library 2.0" handwaving, the bulk of my work colleagues barely tolerate
> listservs, do not read blogs, think wikis are weird, and are afraid to
> tinker with their software preferences. Journals they understand. Journals
> have ISSNs, can be catalogued and routed and indexed. Journals have
> stability (both actual and semiotic) that blogs often lack. Journals are
> an accepted library communications medium.
>

Dorothea, I totally agree with your assessment that a code4lib journal would 
need to define
its audience clearly, but I don't think that audience should be the people you 
describe above
(who a colleague of mine calls "analogue librarians"). If there are any 
accidental techs (or
potential accidental techs) who aren't already hanging out on venues like what 
code4lib
already is (i.e., oss4lib, /usr/lib/info, and a host of email lists, IRC 
channels, and tech
blogs, inside and outside of library land) then they'll probably remain happy 
with thumbing
through the existing diluted journals that librarianship is plagued with, and 
also remain
happy with the delusion (pardon me for saying so) that they are keeping up on 
what's happening
out in the world by reading them.

Sorry if I've misinterpreted your argument, but aiming code4lib at the hard 
core is an
opportunity that we shouldn't miss. I think the success of the conference 
(which I admit I
didn't attend but have heard nothing but good things about) validates that. 
BUT, if the
journal is to be taken seriously, particularly by promotion and tenure 
committees, then it
does have to be peer reviewed and have some  _semblance_ of conventionality.

Mark

Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Phone (604) 291 5753 / Fax (604) 291 3023
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.sfu.ca/~mjordan/

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dinberg Donna]

Dorothea states elegantly what I implied (I guess I needed two cuppas):

> Donna's post suggests a criminally underserved population,
> one I think code4lib could profitably target along with its
> developer core: the "accidental" library tech.  
> there is NOTHING out there for us.    Code4lib needs
> to decide if its communications goals are internally or externally
> focused.

The last statement is really important, and is compounded by what sort of
publication this will be: formal/informal, peer review/not, etc.  Walt
Crawford's observations while reviewing the 10th anniversary edition of
D-Lib Magazine in the latest _Cites_ may be useful.
http://cites.boisestate.edu/civ6i4.pdf

[Walt, commenting on the Bonita Wilson-Allison L. Powell article:]
There's a good explanation of why D-Lib is not a refereed journal. The
founders opted for "quick turn-around from submission to publication over
peer review..."  Despite its less formal status, D-Lib articles have been
cited frequently, an average of nearly  118 citations per year.   
Perhaps, even though it's a magazine, D-Lib has enough of a journal's
formality to discourage most reader feedback.

[Walt, commenting on Amy Friedlander's article:]
She explicitly thought and thinks of D-Lib as a magazine, not a journal.
"[W]e were freed from the canons of peer review to engage in speculation
that might eventually feed into the formal process of juried results."

So, who's your audience?  How will you encourage feedback?  What latitude do
you want to have, and what influence do you intend?

(Going to get second cup now.)
Din.

Donna Dinberg
Systems Librarian/Analyst
Reference and Genealogy Division
Library and Archives Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** My own thoughts, of course, not those of my employer. **

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Sperr, Edwin]

One potential model for a code4lib journal (or at least "how we coded it
good" part of it) is the that of the "methods journal" found in the life
sciences.

Good examples include Nature Methods
 and Biotechniques


Ed Sperr
Digital Services Consultant
NELINET, Inc.
153 Cordaville Rd. Suite 200  Southborough, MA
(508) 597-1931  |  (800) 635-4638 x1931

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Hickey,Thom]

I like the way DLib handles reviewing (pretty much up to the editor(s)).

--Th


-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Edward Corrado
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:56 AM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

Well, since I brought up the idea at code4libcon, I'm in favor of it
:-). I'm not sure how the best way to handle the review process would
be, but I do know that tradition blind peer review would:

a) Be a lot of work
b) Slow down the process (which is a problem with a journal such as
ITAL)
c) Not work because the community is so small, it would be pretty
easy to figure out who
 wrote it (or at least limit it to a few possibilities) anyway,
so it wouldn't really be blind.

Someone (Ross?) mentioned we already have a few journals such as DLib,
Adriane and ITAL. Well, that may be true, but when I look at them I see
mostly big formal projects being written about. I think a code4lib
journal could provide an outlet for small projects and hacks... Things
that a single systems librarian in a smaller library setting can do in
his or her "free" time between going to meetings and staffing the
reference desk. For those who were at code4libcon, a good example of the
type of articles I'm picturing is the Lipstick on a Pig presentation by
Jim Robertson. I don't picture it only being articles like that, but I
do picture that being an outlet for smaller projects like what Jim has
done. I also like the idea of including code snippets and reports on
failed attempts. Really, you can often learn more from reading what
didn't work then reading about what did.

I was thinking about a possible review process while/after talking to
people at code4lib. One idea that came up was that the pre-reviewed
articles can go up, and that anyone in the community can review them and
make comments (sort of like Art's recipes that were passed around the
small village) for a set period of time, and then the author(s) can make
changes. It can then be given a "go" to be published or sent back for
more review and/or revisions. Obviously, this would need to be hashed
out much more. For example, what is the "community," how exactly to
submit comments, who gives the final "go" to consider it accepted, etc.
But this is one possibility.

Well, that is my two cents worth,

Ed C.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Ben Brophy]

Hello,

I'm Ben Brophy. I'm a  UI designer/developer at MIT, working on a
federated search tool for slide libraries, and about 85% of the way
through library school. I am an unrepentant lurker on this list.

I think the journal idea is excellent. Some one asked who would read
this journal, and I think there are a lot of people like me who can't
hit the conference, and don't do IRC or even check the code4lib website
much. But if there were an occasional distilled version of code4lib
goodness I'd be all over it.

http://www.alistapart.com/ might be a good model. They are formal
enough to have issue numbers, an ISSN number and an editorial board,
but not too formal.

Ben

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dorothea Salo]

I'm glad for Donna Dinberg's post, as it crystallizes my overnight
thinking about code4lib and its currently-vaporware journal. This message
may turn long and discursive, for which I apologize in advance.

Code4lib started out as and in many ways still *is* a core group of
library tech people, a group with history, in-jokes, and its own fiery
small-group energy. Roughly half of what I see in this discussion boils
down to a desire for code4lib to continue and expand upon its
achievements, while essentially remaining a self-contained group.
(Certainly a group that welcomes new members -- but still, a
self-contained and self-defined group of people.)

*If that is the desire*, then code4lib.org should fulfill the necessary
communication functions admirably. I will go further: if that is the
desire, a journal of any stripe is useless and may be actively
detrimental. A journal (whatever its pretensions) *isn't really for* the
members of an in-group. It's the in-group's vehicle for reaching outside
itself.

And that's what I see in the other half of this discussion, which turns
upon broadening code4lib into a larger phenomenon within the library (and
tech? not sure) world. This has implications for the small group. Like it
or not, a small group that wants to become a movement within a larger one
has to analyze, consider, and play to the larger group's ways of thinking,
behaving, and communicating.

Inevitably, this means some loss to the small-group culture; in-jokes
don't scale. A couple of bumps and bruises that happened on the way to
code4libcon suggest the kind of outer-directedness and circumspection that
code4lib does not yet have, but *will need* if it is to speak out to the
larger professions (both software development and librarianship, but
librarianship especially).

It also means that Muhammad will have to go talk to the mountain. In
librarianship terms, that means conferences (which code4lib has already
pulled off), and a journal or something very like it. For all the violent
"Library 2.0" handwaving, the bulk of my work colleagues barely tolerate
listservs, do not read blogs, think wikis are weird, and are afraid to
tinker with their software preferences. Journals they understand. Journals
have ISSNs, can be catalogued and routed and indexed. Journals have
stability (both actual and semiotic) that blogs often lack. Journals are
an accepted library communications medium.

Now, code4lib's core is, shall I say, hardcore. Real Developers.
Definitely we don't want to lose that in a welter of shiny new IM toys and
the latest hot end-user out-of-the-box app. Code4lib does not want to
become Computers in Libraries, in other words. Nor, I'm fairly sure, does
it want to go the ITAL/JASIST "whee! theory!" route. Nor does it have an
exclusive focus on "digital libraries" -- it's broader than that, it's
about code in libraries *wherever code happens*, and code happens all over
the place in today's libraries.

I agree that quite a bit of code4lib's ordinary output (on the channel and
on member blogs) deserves wider dissemination in the library world. The
question then becomes "which parts of the library world need to listen?"

Donna's post suggests a criminally underserved population, one I think
code4lib could profitably target along with its developer core: the
"accidental" library tech. We are not developers. We have extremely
limited formal training in computers when we have any at all. We tend to
have pretty good technical aptitude, we may have one or two areas of
genuine technical expertise, and we can talk to Real Developers without
(often) sounding like idiots... but we rely on others to do the
major-league coding and to haul us out of the fire when we break
something. Some of us do grow up to be Real Developers, though, and I
believe it behooves code4lib to think about how to make that happen more
often.

Barring Rachel Singer Gordon's excellent book, there is NOTHING out there
for us. Nothing. ITAL and JASIST are too divorced from daily library
practice and problems (aside from the occasional ITAL squib with a good
hack in it). Computers in Libraries (both mag and conference) is too
fluffy, and doesn't usually put us in touch with the Real Developers who
can and are willing to lend us a hand. Library Hi-Tech is pretty good, but
still not quite right (and not OA, either). Blogs are great, and we both
read and write blogs, but blogs have limits, and aren't smiled upon by our
managers and retention/promotion committees. We *do not have* a
library-blessed communications organ.

I frankly don't think such an organ needs to be peer-reviewed, even
considering retention/promotion concerns, because enough of an aura clings
to techie stuff in librarianship that nobody cares that D-Lib and Ariadne
aren't; a publication in either one is still going to impress the
committee.

So. Summary. Code4lib needs to decide if its communications goals are
internally or externally focused. If internally, then code4lib.org should

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Edward Corrado]

Well, since I brought up the idea at code4libcon, I'm in favor of it
:-). I'm not sure how the best way to handle the review process would
be, but I do know that tradition blind peer review would:

   a) Be a lot of work
   b) Slow down the process (which is a problem with a journal such as
ITAL)
   c) Not work because the community is so small, it would be pretty
easy to figure out who
wrote it (or at least limit it to a few possibilities) anyway,
so it wouldn't really be blind.

Someone (Ross?) mentioned we already have a few journals such as DLib,
Adriane and ITAL. Well, that may be true, but when I look at them I see
mostly big formal projects being written about. I think a code4lib
journal could provide an outlet for small projects and hacks... Things
that a single systems librarian in a smaller library setting can do in
his or her "free" time between going to meetings and staffing the
reference desk. For those who were at code4libcon, a good example of the
type of articles I'm picturing is the Lipstick on a Pig presentation by
Jim Robertson. I don't picture it only being articles like that, but I
do picture that being an outlet for smaller projects like what Jim has
done. I also like the idea of including code snippets and reports on
failed attempts. Really, you can often learn more from reading what
didn't work then reading about what did.

I was thinking about a possible review process while/after talking to
people at code4lib. One idea that came up was that the pre-reviewed
articles can go up, and that anyone in the community can review them and
make comments (sort of like Art's recipes that were passed around the
small village) for a set period of time, and then the author(s) can make
changes. It can then be given a "go" to be published or sent back for
more review and/or revisions. Obviously, this would need to be hashed
out much more. For example, what is the "community," how exactly to
submit comments, who gives the final "go" to consider it accepted, etc.
But this is one possibility.

Well, that is my two cents worth,

Ed C.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Eric Lease Morgan]

On Feb 22, 2006, at 8:03 AM, Dinberg Donna wrote:


Last night I pulled the first 3 issues of JOLA (yeah, I go back
that far)
from my shelf and took a look.  Back in the late '60s, JOLA was
reproducing
images of Hollerith cards, tractor-feed print dumps, flowcharts, and
formulae to illustrate some pretty detailed articles about really
tech-y
stuff pertaining to the mainframe environment in libraries.
Compared to
today's ITAL, the early JOLA was deeper into the guts of library code
development.

You are proposing to go back to that?  I say, Yes!



Me too.

I am looking for code snippets, hacks, Javascript widgets & gadgets,
etc. I believe the inclusion of these sorts of things will set this
journal off from the others. Think of writing code as a sort of
poetry, and this journal is a poetry journal.  ;-)

--
Eric Lease Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dinberg Donna]

OK, folks, it's time for a comment from the peanut gallery.  (Having had my
1st cuppa, I am brave.)

Last night I pulled the first 3 issues of JOLA (yeah, I go back that far)
from my shelf and took a look.  Back in the late '60s, JOLA was reproducing
images of Hollerith cards, tractor-feed print dumps, flowcharts, and
formulae to illustrate some pretty detailed articles about really tech-y
stuff pertaining to the mainframe environment in libraries.  Compared to
today's ITAL, the early JOLA was deeper into the guts of library code
development.

You are proposing to go back to that.  I say, Yes!  I like the idea of this
being within the code4lib site, I like Art's idea re commenting, I like the
idea of more formal sprinkled with shorter and faster.  The topics are what
you all have been cranking out anyway, but they will change as things move
forward.  Hey, you created a conference out of thin air; you can do this,
and invent a new journal type in the process.  (Don't forget the ISSN,
please!)

Although I may not know half the time what you're talking about, I scramble
to keep up and enjoy every minute of it.  I don't code, but perhaps I might
speak for the lurking audience here that doesn't code.  Incrementally, we
learn every time one of you posts a new idea, or points in a different
direction.  We don't sit on and participate in the edge, where you are; but
we are very close, and watch intently.  And, we feed this stuff back into
our own organizations to illuminate possibilities.

Go for it!  You have readership.
Din.

Donna Dinberg
Systems Librarian/Analyst
Reference and Genealogy Division
Library and Archives Canada
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** My own thoughts, of course, not those of my employer. **

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Ross Singer]

On Feb 22, 2006, at 12:26 AM, Daniel Chudnov wrote:


On Feb 21, 2006, at 11:27 PM, Mark Jordan wrote:

In other words, http://code4lib.org/ could _be_ the journal
but it could be a new type of journal.


I'll second this.


Now this I like.  I had feared the overhead and processes of a
traditional journal, but I think code4lib.org is perfect for our
purposes.

I really liked /usr/lib/info, but Dan's right, it was too early.
code4lib.org isn't.

It still sounds like there'd still need to be /a/ process (and we need
to work that out), but the overhead is very low.

And I like that.

-Ross.

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Daniel Chudnov]

On Feb 21, 2006, at 11:27 PM, Mark Jordan wrote:

In other words, http://code4lib.org/ could _be_ the journal
but it could be a new type of journal.


I'll second this.

Four years ago we started /usr/lib/info for roughly this same
purpose, and a number of these same people (usual suspects?) were
involved in that.  Back then things were different web-wise; the
interspeedomushification of technorati and bloglines and such didn't
exist or weren't what they are now, only a minority of our potential
readership/contributorship was in the habit of posting comments to
blogs, and this community wasn't what it is now.

That all that's changed was made inarguably evident to me in the past
month.
Today's bloglines or whathaveyou tell you when somebody's writing
about whatnot nearly instantly, comments on the new oss4lib.org have
practically already surpassed what used to show up in the old one,
and we're a strong enough community to pull off a kick-ass conference
invented in near real-time.

code4lib.org has nearly everything we need already, including the
"branding", whatever that means, and among us are plenty who know how
to make drupal do what it needs or whatever we might invent a need for.

So if /usr/lib/info was a fledgling librarians' first effort at
transformation, our little community must already be founding that
next special issue.  All good things to those that write.

(Hmm, okay, well, maybe "hollywood serial killer" wasn't the best
motif to reference... you get the point, though.)

I've been posting news and revisions of unAPI to code4lib.org because
it's already simply the best place to put it.  Where else would it
go?  Seems just about in line with where you're suggesting we head.

  -dchud

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Roy Tennant]

Well, as usual, Art rocks on his list, but I have to point out a few
of my favorites with some comments.

On Feb 21, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Art Rhyno wrote:


"Our project was a complete disaster, and this is exactly what we did
wrong"


This is _so_ needed. Almost every article I see buries the mistakes
and tries to show how well things went. We need to come clean. Half
the time we fail, or don't deliver what we thought we were
delivering. Let's be honest and we can all learn from it. Reference
my Access 2005 talk if you must.


"Framework shootout: a user comments system in 10 frameworks, from 10
contributors, with comments available in each solution"


Here I have to interject my MODS<->MPEG DIDL shootout idea for the
code4lib conference, which didn't make it, but I still believe we
need. Call it whatever you want, but I want to see us give two teams
a digitized book -- two or more packages of descriptive metadata
(e.g., MARC, ONIX), page image files, and OCR'd text, and have them
report back on what they did, how, and what they can now do with the
result. For my money, that would alone be worth doing a code4lib
journal/magazine/whatever. It doesn't have to be a winner take all
kind of thing, but something that illustrates the trade-offs.


"Federated searching benchmarks: 5 targets, 5 solutions, 1 common
environment"


This is _so_ needed. God, I wish I had the wherewithal to pull it off.


"Talking to your admin people about dspace"


I would amend this, to "Talking to _anyone_ about dspace", and how to
be successful in so doing


"How to whiteboard effectively and convince others you don't need
therapy"


Or, how to prototype with a decent indexer, a scripting language, and
duct tape.

It's time for us to roll up our sleeves, kick tail, and take names.
I'm not sure exactly what roll I can or should take, but the more I
think about this project the better I like it.
Roy

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Mark Jordan]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 11:00:17PM -0500, Art Rhyno wrote:
>
> I guess I am looking for more recipe sharing, comments in the margins, and
> whiteboarding, I wouldn't want to break or detract from anything that is
> working now. All of this happens virtually at some level, but there's
> still some impedance when compared to lightning talks and physical
> gatherings, and sadly, there's a limit to how many conference events can
> be mounted. I am convinced it has to be low barrier, the only reason blogs
> probably produce more information flow than other platforms is because of
> the audacious efficiencies of incremental processing. Add a ponderous
> level, like an article submission to something like D-Lib, and the
> overhead clogs the throughput. No slight against D-Lib and Adriane and the
> rest, we need those too.
>
> So I dunno, but if there's a gap between what can be done now with
> technology and what can be achieved without over-engineering a solution,
> this would be the group to figure it out. And maybe this is as good as it
> gets, which is still better than it was (before irc and cool conferences
> and all that), if that makes any sense.
>

Art, would creating a section at http://code4lib.org/ that was reserved for 
formal, maybe even
peer-reviewed articles do what you're describing? The articles would be the 
starting point,
but the Web 1.9-compliant features that are already appearing on the site 
(comments,
attachments, microformat links, etc.) may satisfy what you're describing. Heck, 
maybe we could
write a module for http://code4lib.org/ that would pull some of these things 
together (drupal
already has a publishing module). In other words, http://code4lib.org/ could 
_be_ the journal
but it could be a new type of journal.

This coming from a guy who's involved in the development of Open Journal 
Systems. That app is
excellent but it is aimed squarely at traditional journals. It is moving fairly 
rapidly toward
a modular, plugin architecture; however, it has a piece to go before it hits 
Web 1.5.

Mark




Mark Jordan
Head of Library Systems
W.A.C. Bennett Library, Simon Fraser University
Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada
Phone (604) 291 5753 / Fax (604) 291 3023
[EMAIL PROTECTED] / http://www.sfu.ca/~mjordan/

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Art Rhyno]

Ok, this is my last message tonight I swear. Bill asked for a dozen
possible titles,

"Ed Summers on being a programming heretic" (actually, pick any 12
programming topics, insert Ed's name in front, and that's an easy dozen)
"What's wrong with my CMS, and probably yours too"
"Options for label printing" (no kidding, it is these kind of nitty gritty
applications that fall through the cracks in major publications, yet end
up consuming huge amounts of resources)
"Our project was a complete disaster, and this is exactly what we did
wrong"
"Framework shootout: a user comments system in 10 frameworks, from 10
contributors, with comments available in each solution"
"How to index and make available documents handed to you in some weird
format"
"Printing solutions for laptops"
"Hitting CPU Limits, when to think about threading"
"Federated searching benchmarks: 5 targets, 5 solutions, 1 common
environment"
"Normalizing call numbers for sorting and other fun activities"
"Talking to your admin people about dspace"
"How to whiteboard effectively and convince others you don't need therapy"


art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Art Rhyno]

>Art, you write more (word count /and/ content) in one blog posting to
>LibraryCog than my contributions in two journal articles.

Thanks Ross, but I still think of Mark Twain's apology for writing long
letters because it was so much harder to make them short :-) Maybe
"journal" is a misnomer, since I am not sure I am really thinking about a
linear stream of textual objects packaged with a table of contents. Two
thoughts come to mind:

1) when I was a kid in a small coal mining village, there was a tradition
where recipes were sometimes shared by putting a meal name, like
"shepherd's pie" on a sheet of paper and it was passed from house to
house. Ingredients and cooking strategies were shared, but the most
fascinating tidbits came from the marginalia ("you know that's too much
brown sugar", "evaporated milk works better", "never tried that, it might
work", "now I know why your oldest son is always at our house").

2) Dan Chudnov visited us in the spring and sketched out some of the ideas
that would appear in COinS and unAPI on a whiteboard. It was amazing, I
kept going back to the whiteboard every couple of days, and probably would
still be doing so if the cleaning staff didn't decide to erase it.

I guess I am looking for more recipe sharing, comments in the margins, and
whiteboarding, I wouldn't want to break or detract from anything that is
working now. All of this happens virtually at some level, but there's
still some impedance when compared to lightning talks and physical
gatherings, and sadly, there's a limit to how many conference events can
be mounted. I am convinced it has to be low barrier, the only reason blogs
probably produce more information flow than other platforms is because of
the audacious efficiencies of incremental processing. Add a ponderous
level, like an article submission to something like D-Lib, and the
overhead clogs the throughput. No slight against D-Lib and Adriane and the
rest, we need those too.

So I dunno, but if there's a gap between what can be done now with
technology and what can be achieved without over-engineering a solution,
this would be the group to figure it out. And maybe this is as good as it
gets, which is still better than it was (before irc and cool conferences
and all that), if that makes any sense.

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[William Denton]

On 21 February 2006, Ross Singer wrote:


We have a Code4lib planet.  We have Ariadne and we have D-Lib (and, as
we learned last week, we have ITAL).


There are no code snippets in D-Lib.  I don'e know Aridne well (I'll
remedy that) but at a glance I don't see code there.  Library geek
code4lib types do blog cool hacks and problem fixes, but an article would
give them more room for context and instruction.

If the model is THE PERL JOURNAL and THE PERL REVIEW and similar
magazines, I think it could work really well.  They often have articles by
good programmers who needed to do something (or felt like having fun), did
it, and wrote it up so that the reader learns something useful.  There are
lots of articles written about social implications of wikis, and using
metadata, but I'd like to read one about how someone hacks MediaWiki to
build in a Dublin Core-based application profile.  Is there a home for
that kind of article now?

The first recurring feature should be how to sort LC call numbers in
different languages!

Jeff and Roy and Art and others: what kind of articles and columns do you
imagine might run in it?  Can you suggest a dozen example titles?

Bill
--
William Denton : Toronto, Canada : www.miskatonic.org : www.frbr.org

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Eric Lease Morgan]

I too think find the idea of a journal intriguing.

Without knowing a whole of the discussion, I would hope the journal
would be a lot like Ariadne or DLib Magazine. I think successful
journals establish a regular format over time. Some of these things
include introductory editorials, regular columns, the occasional
theme issue, a balance between theoretical/thought provoking articles
on one hand and practical information people can use on the other,
and an identifiable graphic design. As a techno-weenie journal I
would expect it to exemplify and put into practice "kewl" features.
Being a library journal I would expect rich meta-data, regular issues
and numbering, and decent indexing.

Editing a journal is time consuming. There soliciting articles.
Keeping authors on track. Editing. Graphic design and layout. Repeat.
Who has the time for this sort of work, and how will they continue to
be motivated? To get things started, I would suggest quite a number
of articles be front-loaded into a queue allowing the editor(s) to
work on issues many numbers of months (or quarters) out.

Finally, I like the idea of Code4LibJournal because I believe it is
necessary for the library profession to take more advantage --
exploit -- computers in order to do library work. This often requires
programming/scripting, and a journal might begin to raise the
knowledge of computer in libraries accordingly.

I don't exactly know how, but y'all can count me in for some of my time.

--
Eric Lease Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Ross Singer]

Art,

I think you make a point here that Rob Sanderson (I think) made in the
IRC channel today.

We have a Code4lib planet.  We have Ariadne and we have D-Lib (and, as
we learned last week, we have ITAL).

Where would the market for this journal be?  Who would read it?  Would
it just be the same people that read the planet?

Dorothea made a good point about the publish-or-perish faculty track.
I understand that.  I'm just not sure that we need another niche
journal.

I don't really oppose something like this.  I'm just not entirely sure
I see the value.

Art, you write more (word count /and/ content) in one blog posting to
LibraryCog than my contributions in two journal articles.  As a
professional (ok, by virtue that I get paid for what I do, not how I
conduct myself), I get more out of the timely blog postings I read than
the journal articles that I occasionally read (although there's value
in... what, 60% of those, too?).

So... take this how you will.

-Ross.

On Feb 21, 2006, at 9:01 PM, Art Rhyno wrote:


This is intriguing, I really like the idea of a publication that would
have a high level of technical content, even if only to inspire more
folks
to consider the IT side of libraries. I would really like to see a low
barrier way of capturing the excitement and enthusiasm that came
through
in the lightning talks at the conference in a journal-like setting, I
don't know if that's possible. I also wondered about the concept of a
"scenario of the month", some sort of technical challenge or problem,
and
providing a forum to describe some possible solutions with different
tools. If you could give people like Dan Chudnov a whiteboard and Ed
Summers a broader canvas for sketching out programming strategies in a
journal format, that alone would instantly run circles around the other
library tech publications out there.

I think this is worth pursuing, and in true code4lib spirit, maybe it
can
push the boundaries of what is possible with a journal. For example,
maybe
podcasts and screen captures could be used in addition to text.

Speaking as someone who can barely keep one blog active, has let
another
almost lapse into oblivion, and spends a lot of time cursing the whole
notion of publishing these days. On the other hand, if you want to
produce
a version in paper and need it bundled with bailing twine...

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Roy Tennant]

I'd like to second Art's feedback. Where I'd like to see this go is
into the very uncharted territory for library mags/journals -- the
truly technical rag. I'm not sure I'd be so into the standard "peer
review" structure, or if so, only for a select few articles that
seemed appropriate. Rather, I think some of the more innovative ways
to present interesting problems and solutions that Art sketched out
would be truly ground-breaking and well worth the effort.
Roy

On Feb 21, 2006, at 6:01 PM, Art Rhyno wrote:


This is intriguing, I really like the idea of a publication that would
have a high level of technical content, even if only to inspire
more folks
to consider the IT side of libraries. I would really like to see a low
barrier way of capturing the excitement and enthusiasm that came
through
in the lightning talks at the conference in a journal-like setting, I
don't know if that's possible. I also wondered about the concept of a
"scenario of the month", some sort of technical challenge or
problem, and
providing a forum to describe some possible solutions with different
tools. If you could give people like Dan Chudnov a whiteboard and Ed
Summers a broader canvas for sketching out programming strategies in a
journal format, that alone would instantly run circles around the
other
library tech publications out there.

I think this is worth pursuing, and in true code4lib spirit, maybe
it can
push the boundaries of what is possible with a journal. For
example, maybe
podcasts and screen captures could be used in addition to text.

Speaking as someone who can barely keep one blog active, has let
another
almost lapse into oblivion, and spends a lot of time cursing the whole
notion of publishing these days. On the other hand, if you want to
produce
a version in paper and need it bundled with bailing twine...

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Art Rhyno]

This is intriguing, I really like the idea of a publication that would
have a high level of technical content, even if only to inspire more folks
to consider the IT side of libraries. I would really like to see a low
barrier way of capturing the excitement and enthusiasm that came through
in the lightning talks at the conference in a journal-like setting, I
don't know if that's possible. I also wondered about the concept of a
"scenario of the month", some sort of technical challenge or problem, and
providing a forum to describe some possible solutions with different
tools. If you could give people like Dan Chudnov a whiteboard and Ed
Summers a broader canvas for sketching out programming strategies in a
journal format, that alone would instantly run circles around the other
library tech publications out there.

I think this is worth pursuing, and in true code4lib spirit, maybe it can
push the boundaries of what is possible with a journal. For example, maybe
podcasts and screen captures could be used in addition to text.

Speaking as someone who can barely keep one blog active, has let another
almost lapse into oblivion, and spends a lot of time cursing the whole
notion of publishing these days. On the other hand, if you want to produce
a version in paper and need it bundled with bailing twine...

art

Re: [CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Dorothea Salo]

Davis, Jeffrey wrote:

One of the ideas that came out of last week's conference in Corvallis
was for a code4lib journal.  Here's a proposal for what such a journal
might look like; comments, article submissions, and volunteers are all
welcome.


   I think this is a fine idea. Higher-ups willing (and I think they would
be), I can offer it an install of Open Journal Systems for a home, as
well as a DSpace installation for a preservation failsafe.


In addition to a number of full-length, in-depth articles on the above
topics, I would also like to see a section of each issue devoted to
shorter, "lightning talk"-style articles directly relevant and useful to
the people actually working with Dspace, MODS, content management
systems, and recalcitrant OPACS.  Some possible subjects might be:


   A "hack of the month" might be a useful ongoing feature. If it proves
popular, it could even be subdivided into the "Web hack of the month,"
"OPAC hack of the month," etc.


WOULD IT BE PEER REVIEWED?

That's a good question, and I'd like to discuss it.  Given the
relatively small size of the field, peer review might not be feasible.


   Possible to do some of both. Peer-reviewed articles, editor-vetted
shorter pieces.


I'm personally interested in the idea of a collaborative review process
-- less traditional peer review, more Slashdot/Digg/Wikipedia -- but
that has its downsides as well.  What do people think?


   If we get something like that working, there'd be a research article in
it for somebody. ;)

   For the less-theoretical pieces, I should think an "I tried this and it
worked!" button would be an effective alternative peer-review mechanism.

Dorothea

[CODE4LIB] A code4lib journal proposal

[Davis, Jeffrey]

One of the ideas that came out of last week's conference in Corvallis
was for a code4lib journal.  Here's a proposal for what such a journal
might look like; comments, article submissions, and volunteers are all
welcome.

***

WHAT WOULD THE JOURNAL BE ABOUT?

The code4lib conference's call for proposals included the following
description of the prepared talks:

"Prepared talks are 20 minutes, and must center on 'tools' (some cool
new software, software library or integration platform), 'specs' (how to
get the most out of some protocols, or proposals for new ones), or
'challenges' (One or more big problems we should collectively address).
We will evaluate proposals on criteria of usefulness, newness,
geekiness, and diversity of topics."

A code4lib journal would focus on the same topics -- tools, specs, and
challenges in the sphere of library technology -- and articles would be
evaluated for acceptance based on the same criteria (except maybe
diversity of topics).

In addition to a number of full-length, in-depth articles on the above
topics, I would also like to see a section of each issue devoted to
shorter, "lightning talk"-style articles directly relevant and useful to
the people actually working with Dspace, MODS, content management
systems, and recalcitrant OPACS.  Some possible subjects might be:

* successful projects
* failed projects
* calls to action
* common mistakes
* useful techniques

(For more information on lightning talks, see the description here:
http://perl.plover.com/lt/lightning-talks.html )

In essence, the journal would be a formal venue for library
technologists to share their ideas with one another.

***

WHO WOULD WRITE THE ARTICLES?

Well, if you're reading this message, chances are you're working on an
interesting project that other people would like to read about.  Maybe
you've written a good article on your blog that could be polished a bit
and turned into an article.  (Heck, maybe you gave a presentation at the
conference!)  And there are lots of other people out there who have
never heard of code4lib, but who are working on interesting projects
too.  The success of the Access and code4lib conferences suggests that
there is a serious market for this sort of thing.

***

WOULD IT BE OPEN ACCESS?

Yes.

***

WOULD IT BE PEER REVIEWED?

That's a good question, and I'd like to discuss it.  Given the
relatively small size of the field, peer review might not be feasible.
I'm personally interested in the idea of a collaborative review process
-- less traditional peer review, more Slashdot/Digg/Wikipedia -- but
that has its downsides as well.  What do people think?

***

IS A CODE4LIB JOURNAL REALLY A GOOD IDEA?

There's been some discussion in the #code4lib IRC channel as to whether
a journal is the best approach.  The planet code4lib blog aggregator
(http://planet.code4lib.org/) already brings together a lot of
interesting and innovative work; combining it with a "Carnival" type
approach (http://infosciences.pbwiki.com/) would be another option.

I think an actual journal would have several advantages over other
models:

* It would be more authoritative.
* It would be more compact.
* It would attract readers and contributors from a broader
population.
* It would provide a more formal publication venue for those whose
job requirements include publication.
* It would have an editorial review process, filtering out noise,
dead ends, and broken ideas.

***

Thoughts?  Suggestions?  Jeers?  Please share any or all of them.

--
Jeff Davis
Public Services Librarian
University of Alberta Libraries
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IM screen name: jd4v15 (MSN, AIM, Yahoo)