Aside from niceness, NDAs and fear of litigation, there are other
factors that influence the lack of detailed product information and
critiques.
A lot of patrons may use library systems but often their interaction is
limited and indirect with a specific vendor's product. It is often
rebrande
Kyle Banerjee writes
> Our profession is very risk averse.
But fortunately we don't have any stereotypes around here. ;-)
Isn't the vendor the one the name of which starts with O, and the
product name ends with M?
Cheers,
Thomas Krichelhttp://openlib.org/home/kr
> Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this?
>
> Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so
> the information is available for people who need it?
>
I agree that the practice is unfortunate as I personally believe that
critics are the
Salvete!
*Warning Ranty. Brooke's Ideas shouldn't actually be consumed by anyone,
ever.*
> Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this?
>
> Our reluctance to share info on problems with software we use (because of
> fear
> of offending the vendor?) means that i
http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/4438
see KOHA section.
Markus Fischer
Am 25.01.2012 22:47, schrieb Ethan Gruber:
+1
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote:
itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archiv
+1
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
> On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote:
>
>> itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archives that
>> splits a field in two anytime a field that needs to be represented by an
>> XML entity is encountered. Name
On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote:
itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archives that
splits a field in two anytime a field that needs to be represented by an
XML entity is encountered. Name withheld to protect the guilty.
Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilt
