On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:

> On another topic, I also think it's good to have options, so I'm not
> sure I expect (or would welcome) total convergence between various open
> source ILS projects. But to the extent we're imagining various loosely
> coupled modules which can be mixed-and-matched, I fantasize that the
> modules from various open source (AND proprietary!) ILSs can become
> inter-operable, so an institution can take the one that best meets it's
> needs in each class, and mix-and-match them. Different ones may meet
> different institutions needs best.
>

Just to take this idea a bit farther, I believe it that to design a
successful "next-generation" ILS you will need to decompose the problem
into its constituent parts.  At that point, I strongly suspect that the
library-specific pieces will be a small percentage of the whole.  In fact,
the idea of an ILS itself is probably outdated.  What we are talking about
is a distributed system for organizing metadata, inventory control,
workflow, etc.  Surely metadata/cataloging practices will come into play,
but on the edges of the system, not at it's core (i.e., metadata schemas &
library practices are implementation artifacts, not design principles).

The emergence of the OpenSRF framework from the Evergreen project is
certainly a sign that this sort of thinking is taking hold (and is a
hopeful sign, for sure!).  The question becomes: what do we need to do,
and what tools do we need to do that. E.g., we need sophisticated
messaging -- Jabbber looks to be the proper protocol, so lets build the
tools to make that possible -- thus emerges OpenSRF.  One can find either
best-of-breed software OR best-of-breed architectural principles (e.g.,
REST) as a starting point and build a compelling framework to allow the
next steps towards tackling the library domain-specific tasks.  I suspect
a distributed system used by a library will look a heck of a lot like a
distributed system used in other domains, so constantly looking "outside
the walls" will be a real key.

--Peter Keane

The University of Texas at Austin
Liberal Arts ITS


> Jonathan
>
>
>> --John
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2008 11:02 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 28, 2008, at 5:26 PM, John Little wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The Duke University Libraries are preparing a proposal for the Mellon
>>>> Foundation to convene the academic library community to design an open
>>>> source Integrated Library System (ILS)....
>>>>
>>> Personally, I think this is a good idea. Yes, there are existent
>>> ILSs, but such things are not the be-all and end-all of ILSs. The
>>> software implementation, whether it be operating systems, text
>>> editors, or integrated library systems is an iterative process. It
>>> repeats. Moreover, there are many ways to get there from here; one
>>> size does not fit all. The process outlined will enable a thousand
>>> flowers to bloom, or call it friendly competition.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Eric Lease Morgan
>>> University Libraries of Notre Dame
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> [log in to unmask]
>> ILS Support Section Head
>> Duke University Libraries
>> 919.660-5932
>>
>>
>
> --
> Jonathan Rochkind
> Digital Services Software Engineer
> The Sheridan Libraries
> Johns Hopkins University
> 410.516.8886
> rochkind (at) jhu.edu
>