It's not social bookmarking, but as far as "But I'm thinking now about
the possibility of a search engine limited to sites cooperatively vetted by
librarians, that would incorporate ranking by # links. Something more
responsive than cataloging websites in our catalogs.", well, that's almost
exactly what lii.org is.
I happen to think that authority is dead dead dead as a method of measuring
information worth, but that's just me. :-)
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 10:53 AM, Cindy Harper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I've been thinking about the role of libraries as promoter of authoritative
> works - helping to select and sort the plethora of information out there.
> And I heard another presentation about social media this morning. So I
> though I'd bring up for discussion here some of the ideas I've been mulling
> Last week I sent this message to the "Suggestions and Ideas" forum at
> The basic idea is to develop a delicious network of librarians. Or a
> of faculty members. Then have one login whose network included those
> and share that login so that lots of people could share that network.
> Delicious responded that we could have a wiki where people posted their
> delicious names so that others could add them to their personal networks,
> but that doesn't scale up very well.
> Or another project I've toyed with, involving focused searching: I started
> with Robert Teeter's index to Great Books lists.
> I've almost completed pulling them into a MySQL database so that I could
> sort the titles by the number of Great Books lists that mention each title.
> Then I thought about how one could do focused searching of the web,
> collecting pages with a title containing (best and books) or (great and
> books), and screen scraping title lists (you'd have to have some heuristic
> method of identifying the data, of course, and I'm aware what problems
> arise there). But my test searches in that idea showed that one runs into
> lot of commercial ephemeral lists and spurious lists. Now, you could rely
> on crowd-sourcing to filter out the consensus by ranking by the number of
> sites/cites. But I thought you might want to differentiate between the
> source - .edus, librarys, etc.
> So that led me to speculate about a search engine that ranked just by links
> from .edu's, libraries sites, and a librarian-vetted list of .orgs,
> scholarly publishers, etc. I think you can limit by .edu in the
> in Google - I haven't tried that much. if anyone here has experience at
> using tha technique, I'd like to hear about it. But I'm thinking now about
> the possibility of a search engine limited to sites cooperatively vetted by
> librarians, that would incorporate ranking by # links. Something more
> responsive than cataloging websites in our catalogs.
> Is anyone else thinking about these ideas? or do you know of projects that
> approach this goal of leveraging librarian's vetting of authoritative
> Cindy Harper, Systems Librarian
> Colgate University Libraries
> [log in to unmask]
Follow me on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/griffey