The code4lib wiki is kind of a pain to use for this stuff, in part
because MediaWiki isn't really suited for it. (I still think DokuWiki
would work a lot better for Code4Lib in general. Anyone interested in
volunteering to install/manage a dokuwiki install on code4lib.org?
Assuming OSU would be okay with that).
But I think what you've identified is theoretically an appropriate use
of Code4Lib community tools. I just worry that the tools we currently
have aren't appropriate for the use you want to put them to!
As far as your particular project (whose success I care about regardless
of if it's using code4lib tools or not), I also worry that even with
some communication and collaborative work taking place on the wiki,
without strong management/facillitation, it's just going to be chaos and
not result in anything useful. So I don't know if this plan gets you
guys out of putting lots of time into it, if that's what you were hoping
it would. But that's your team's business. :) Either way, yes, I think
it is appropriate to use Code4Lib community tools for that project. But
I'm not sure the tools we have available are appropriate for your project.
Emily Lynema wrote:
> Many apologies for the cross-posting, but I wanted to make sure all the
> involved parties were fully represented.
> I have 2 questions that relate to the work of the ILS Discovery
> Interface Task Force , the work of the jangle community , and the
> code4lib community in general.
> 1. At the Discovery Interface Task Force breakout session at code4lib,
> there were many folks interested in moving beyond the abstract DLF
> recommendation document  to more detailed function specifications
> that could actually be implemented with specific technologies and
> metadata formats. While we'd love to be able to fully specify a single
> uniform API specification, those of us on the DLF group feel we lack the
> time, resources, nor expertise to do this without community input.
> The idea of providing a wiki where anyone could contribute ideas about
> implementing the recommended functionality (which would hopefully evolve
> into best practices over time) was well received at code4lib. However,
> DLF doesn't have an openly available wiki and may not be shepherding
> this work in the future. Code4lib.org *does* have an openly available
> At the same time, I see a lot of interest going into an API
> specification for jangle. I think these projects could work together on
> defining metadata formats and schemas that support the DLF
> functionality. But I don't know if the jangle specification will provide
> a direct mapping to the functions in the DLF recommendation. Jangle
> already has an open wiki hosted by Google Code (and a Drupal
> In the spirit of democratic openness, I wanted to poll the community.
> Does it make sense to start a space on the code4lib.org wiki regarding
> implementation of the DLF recommendation? Is that an acceptable use of
> the wiki? Or does it make more sense to point to the jangle wiki as a
> place for discussion?
> 2. During the code4lib breakout session, we also discussed creating a
> wiki where library developers could share their past work to access data
> stored in the ILS (ex: I've written a function that retrieves live
> holdings in SirsiDynix, I've written a function that places a hold in
> Innovative, etc.). We would hope to move toward a point where the code
> could actually be posted and shared in an open source fashion (no one
> really knows about NDAs yet). Is this an acceptable use of the code4lib
> wiki? Google Code makes sense for posting code, but seems like overkill
> if all you need is a wiki.
> Please let me know if you have any input or suggestions.
> -emily lynema
>  https://project.library.upenn.edu/confluence/display/ilsapi/Home
>  http://jangle.org - community-driven, open source project to create
> a uniform API specification across all ILS products as well as code for
> individual connectors for each individual ILS system to implement that
> API. Jangle could serve as a reference implementation / binding for the
> DLF recommendations, or the recommended DLF functions could be
> implemented on top of Jangle and its system connectors.
>  For the Feb. 15 draft, see
> Word: http://tinyurl.com/2bzrje
> Emily Lynema
> Systems Librarian for Digital Projects
> Information Technology, NCSU Libraries
> [log in to unmask]
Digital Services Software Engineer
The Sheridan Libraries
Johns Hopkins University
rochkind (at) jhu.edu