The University of Rochester is pleased to announce the open source
release of its institutional repository IR+. Following a successful
production launch on Tuesday October 12th, IR+ 2.0 is now available to
the entire community.
IR+ was born from user research. With portfolios, personal
Hi all,
I realize that some of you may not directly deal with this issue, but I
was wondering if I could get some quick replies about how your
institutions are handling access to off-campus resources via VPN and Proxy.
Do you offer a VPN service? If so, do you split-tunnel the traffic so
Neat, if you put this into production at a public URL anytime, do let us
know.
Elliot Hallmark wrote:
Re: simple, flexible ILS for small library
hello all,
Just wanted to mention that I did decide to code an ILS for a book
sharing library. Tweaking conventional ILS or bartering software
Hello Code4Lib,
Does anyone have any recommendations for learning Django? Books, websites,
video tutorials, etc. ...
thanks,
Junior Tidal
Assistant Professor
Web Services and Multimedia Librarian
New York City College of Technology, CUNY
300 Jay Street
Brooklyn, NY 11210
718.260.5481
There's the Django Book: http://www.djangobook.com/ (Make sure you choose the
revised edition for 1.0)
The Django docs, with some intro tutorials:
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.2/
Did you try those already?
On 2010-10-25, at 10:19 AM, Junior Tidal wrote:
Hello Code4Lib,
Does anyone
I'd start here:
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.2/
There are some tutorials in there as well.
-Mike
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:19, Junior Tidal jti...@citytech.cuny.edu wrote:
Hello Code4Lib,
Does anyone have any recommendations for learning Django? Books, websites,
video
We have VPN and Proxy(III WAM) available here although for our online
resources VPN doesn't get you anything special you still go through proxy.
The regular URLs and Proxy URLs are in a PostgreSQL database and the page with
the links to online resources is dynamically fed based on your IP
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Junior Tidal jti...@citytech.cuny.edu wrote:
Does anyone have any recommendations for learning Django? Books, websites,
video tutorials, etc. ...
For resources, learn django in Google shows a bunch of promising hints.
Methodology-wise: Start with a fairly
I recently set up a testing framework allowing me to twiddle Solr
knobs until I met acceptance criteria for LC call number searching. I
came up with two Solr field types that worked for my criteria.
You can read all about it here:
I just finished a bunch of blog posts about the sorts of tests to
write for Solr indexing software. Comments are welcome. Try not to
drool when you fall asleep on your keyboard.
Start with this one:
http://discovery-grindstone.blogspot.com/2010/10/testing-solr-indexing-software.html
-
I agree with Jonathan and David. The only reason there are no examples
of including dlf:simpleavailability within dlf:holdingsrec is
because no one thought of a use case for why you would do that. The xsd
for dlf:holdingsrec explicitly states that it is simply Metadata must
be expressed in XML
Emily Lynema wrote:
standardized metadata! While we had envisioned using something like
MARCXML or ISO Holdings here to express things like serial runs, there
Kind of a side note, but please consider ONIX Serial Holdings for
expressing serial runs! It is by far the best schema I've seen
Hi all,
I've just spent the last couple of weeks delving into and decoding a
binary file format. This, in turn, got me thinking about MARCXML.
In a nutshell, it looks like it's supposed to contain the exact same
data as a normal MARC record, except in XML form. As in, it should be
MARC records break parsing far too frequently. Apart from requiring no
truly specialized tools, MARCXML should—should!—eliminate many of
those problems. That's not to mention that MARC character sets vary a
lot (DanMARC anyone?), and more even in practice than in theory.
From my perspective the
I'm not a big user of MARCXML, but I can think of a few reasons off the top of
my head:
- Existing libraries for reading, manipulating and searching XML-based
documents are very mature.
- Documents can be validated for their well-formedness using these existing
tools and a pre-defined schema
Dear Nate,
There is a trade-off: do you want very fast processing of data - go for binary
data. do you want to share your data globally easily in many (not per se
library related) environments - go for XML/RDF.
Open your data and do both :-)
Pat
Sent from my iPhone
On 25 Oct 2010, at 20:39,
It's helpful to think of MARCXML as a sort of lingua franca.
- Existing libraries for reading, manipulating and searching XML-based
documents are very mature.
Including XSLT and XPath; very powerful stuff.
There's nothing stopping you from reading the MARCXML into a binary blob and
working
- XML is self-describing, binary is not.
Not to quibble, but that's only in a theoretical sense here. Something
like Amazon XML is truly self-describing. MARCXML is self-obfuscating.
At least MARC records kinda imitate catalog cards.
:)
Tim
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Andrew Hankinson
On Monday, October 25, 2010 1:50 PM, Andrew Hankinson wrote:
- Documents can be validated for their well-formedness using these existing
tools and a pre-defined schema (a validator for MARC would need to be
custom-coded)
In Perl, MARC::Lint might be an example of such a validator (though I
I think you'd have a very hard time demonstrating any speed advantage to MARC
over MARCXML. XML parsers have been speed optimized out the wazoo; If there
exists a MARC parser that has ever been speed-optimized without serious
compromise, I'm sure someone on this list will have a good story
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Tim Spalding t...@librarything.com wrote:
- XML is self-describing, binary is not.
Not to quibble, but that's only in a theoretical sense here. Something
like Amazon XML is truly self-describing. MARCXML is self-obfuscating.
At least MARC records kinda imitate
Hiya,
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Nate Vack njv...@wisc.edu wrote:
Switching to an XML format doesn't help with that at all.
I'm willing to take it further and say that MARCXML was the worst
thing the library world ever did. Some might argue it was a good first
step, and that it was better
I guess what I meant is that in MARCXML, you have a datafield element with
subsequent subfield elements each with fairly clear attributes, which, while
not my idea of fun Sunday-afternoon reading, requires less specialized tools to
parse (hello Textmate!) and is a bit easier than trying to
I'll just leave this here:
http://www.indexdata.com/blog/2010/05/turbomarc-faster-xml-marc-records
That trade-off ought to offend both camps, though I happen to think it's quite
clever.
MJ
On 2010-10-25, at 3:22 PM, Eric Hellman wrote:
I think you'd have a very hard time demonstrating any
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Tim Spalding t...@librarything.com wrote:
Does processing speed of something matter anymore? You'd have to be
doing a LOT of processing to care, wouldn't you?
Data migrations and data dumps are a common use case. Needing to break or
make hundreds of thousands
Does processing speed of something matter anymore? You'd have to be
doing a LOT of processing to care, wouldn't you?
Tim
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 3:35 PM, MJ Suhonos m...@suhonos.ca wrote:
I'll just leave this here:
http://www.indexdata.com/blog/2010/05/turbomarc-faster-xml-marc-records
That
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Eric Hellman e...@hellman.net wrote:
I think you'd have a very hard time demonstrating any speed advantage to
MARC over MARCXML. XML parsers have been speed optimized out the wazoo; If
there exists a MARC parser that has ever been speed-optimized without
Yes, it is designed to be a round-trippable expression of ordinary marc
in XML. Some reasons this is useful:
1. No maximum record length, unlike actual marc which tops out at ~10k.
2. You can use XSLT and other XML tools to work with it, and store it in
stores optimized for XML (or that only
MODS was an attempt to mostly-but-not-entirely-roundtrippably represent
data in MARC in a format that's more 'normal' XML, without packed bytes
in elements, with element names that are more or less self-documenting,
etc. It's caught on even less than MARCXML though, so if you find
MARCXML
Marc in JSON can be a nice middle-ground, faster/smaller than MarcXML
(although still probably not as binary), based on a standard low-level
data format so easier to work with using existing tools (and developers
eyes) than binary, no maximum record length.
There have been a couple competing
Tim Spalding wrote:
Does processing speed of something matter anymore? You'd have to be
doing a LOT of processing to care, wouldn't you?
Yes,which sometimes you are. Say, when you're indexing 2 or 3 or 10
million marc records into, say, solr.
Which is faster depends on what language and
JSON++
I routinely re-index about 2.5M JSON records (originally from binary MARC), and
it's several orders of magnitude faster than XML (measured in single-digit
minutes rather than double-digit hours). I'm not sure if it's in the same
range as binary MARC, but as Tim says, it's plenty fast
Kyle Banerjee wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Tim Spalding t...@librarything.com wrote:
Does processing speed of something matter anymore? You'd have to be
doing a LOT of processing to care, wouldn't you?
Data migrations and data dumps are a common use case. Needing to break or
Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I haven't actively looked for resources
since I'm busy doing collection development. However, I came across an
advertisement for a Django book and figured it would be a useful language to
learn. I already know php, so it seems logical that django is the next
Agreed on the docs at the website. If you can't figure something out
from those, dig into the source. Happy hacking!
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Michael J. Giarlo
leftw...@alumni.rutgers.edu wrote:
I'd start here:
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.2/
There are some tutorials in
If you already know PHP you might want to check out Symfony or another
PHP framework to get the hang of web frameworks, then move onto other
languages from there.
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Junior Tidal jti...@citytech.cuny.edu wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I haven't actively
It really is possible to make your point without being quite so obnoxious.
Everyone else seems to be able to do so. --Ray
-Original Message-
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:code4...@listserv.nd.edu] On Behalf Of
Alexander Johannesen
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 3:38 PM
To:
Django is a web framework; Python is the language.
If you don't know the difference, I'd suggest sticking with PHP and going with
one of the frameworks available to you there.
On 2010-10-25, at 4:25 PM, Junior Tidal wrote:
Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I haven't actively looked for
Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress r...@loc.gov wrote:
It really is possible to make your point without being quite so obnoxious.
Obnoxious?
Alex
--
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
--- http://shelter.nu/blog/
I know there are two parts of this discussion (speed on the one hand,
applicability/features on teh other), but for the former, running a little
benchmark just isn't that hard. Aren't we supposed to, you know, prefer to
make decisions based on data?
Note: I'm only testing deserialization because
I know the difference.
Andrew Hankinson andrew.hankin...@gmail.com 10/25/2010 4:40 PM
Django is a web framework; Python is the language.
If you don't know the difference, I'd suggest sticking with PHP and going with
one of the frameworks available to you there.
On 2010-10-25, at 4:25 PM,
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 6:33 PM, Gabriel Farrell gsf...@gmail.com wrote:
If you already know PHP you might want to check out Symfony or another
PHP framework to get the hang of web frameworks, then move onto other
languages from there.
I've been using Django for a couple of years now, and have
b) expanding it to be actual useful and interesting.
But here I think you've missed the very utility of MARC-XML.
Let's say you have a binary MARC file (the kind that comes out of an ILS) and
want to transform that into MODS, Dublin Core, or maybe some other XML schema.
How would you do
On Oct 25, 2010, at 8:56 PM, Walker, David wrote:
Your criticisms of MARC-XML all seem to presume that MARC-XML is the goal,
the end point in the process. But MARC-XML is really better seen as a
utility, a middle step between binary MARC and the real goal, which is some
other useful and
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Walker, David dwal...@calstate.edu wrote:
Your criticisms of MARC-XML all seem to presume that MARC-XML is the
goal, the end point in the process. But MARC-XML is really better seen as a
utility, a middle step between binary MARC and the real goal, which is
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Alexander Johannesen
alexander.johanne...@gmail.com wrote:
Lots of people around the library world infra-structure will think
that since your data is now in XML it has taken some important step
towards being inter-operable with the rest of the world, that
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Bill Dueber b...@dueber.com wrote:
Here, I think you're guilty of radically underestimating lots of people
around the library world. No one thinks MARC is a good solution to
our modern problems, and no one who actually knows what MARC
is has trouble
i'm not a coder but i undertook a study of XML some years after it
came onto the scene and with a likely confused notion that it would be
the next significant technology, I learned some XSL and later was able
to weave PubMed Central journal information (CSV transformed into XML)
together with
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Alexander Johannesen
alexander.johanne...@gmail.com wrote:
Political? For sure. Engineering? Not so much.
Ok. Solve it. Let us know when you're done.
--
Bill Dueber
Library Systems Programmer
University of Michigan Library
Sorry. That was rude, and uncalled for. I disagree that the problem is
easily solved, even without the politics. There've been lots of attempts to
try to come up with a sufficiently expressive toolset for dealing with
biblio data, and we're still working on it. If you do think you've got some
50 matches
Mail list logo
