Art Rhyno wrote:
>This is something you might be able to do with a blog that has any kind of
>API. I have thought about something like this with squishdot for example.
>If dynix lets you add any of your own HTML to the display, you could insert
Like others who have contributed to this thread after Art, I think this
has real power. I spent a bit of time thinking: "how would I connect
this to Dynix's Horizon Information Portal (tm) (aka HIP, aka iPac)?"
[Yes, even time I think about Dynix I think (tm)]
side technology, which means:
a) the user environment may be disabled or incompatible with my
In the case of HIP it would be possible to alter the XSL stylesheets
that are used to build the page in such a way as to present links to URL
Encoded titles, ISBN or even database specific RSNs (in classic Dynix
terms, BIB IDs). However ...
b) *I* prefer to ensure that there *is* content at the end of links
before putting them on a user's screen.
The Edmonton Public example appears to offer links to Amazon et
al. whether or not the book is available (or reviewed) at that target or
not. By contrast, the film links can take advantage of IMDB and the
Movie Review Query Engine.
At this point, the question emerges "is there a print equivalent of
the MRQE that we could all point to?"
If not, what would be required?
a) a local system so that local users can write reviews that are
somehow linked to from the local catalogue?
b) a general system, that can be linked to *from* all our local
catalogues, that invites users to contribute reviews?
c) an OAI modeled system that can harvest reviews from a)
d) an RSS modeled system that can publish local reviews for
aggregation into a system like b)
e) an OpenURL styled system that can identify reviews in electronic
journals (to which we may or may not have access)?
f) a standardized interface for querying the shared review engine
that might respond to different access points?
g) a better idea yet?
Obviously, there are both alternatives and complementary ideas in the
above bundle. Pleas don't confuse it with anything other than speculation.
To me, the power and attraction of the IMDB approach to reviews is that
users have the choice of the professional reviewers and those whose
opinions may not have been paid for (but who knows!).
Note that I work in a public library which means that my further
employment and advancement is not dependent on uttering the words "peer
review" in discussions like these, but as someone who has worked both
sides of the peer review process I respect the issues and would welcome
someone's insights into how, or whether, this process needs to address
that problem set.
Halton Hills Public Library