 |
 |
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. Jonathan 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 [1], the work of the jangle community [2], 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 [3] 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 > wiki. > > 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 > installation). > > 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. > Thanks! > > -emily lynema > > [1] https://project.library.upenn.edu/confluence/display/ilsapi/Home > > [2] 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. > > [3] For the Feb. 15 draft, see > Wiki: > https://project.library.upenn.edu/confluence/display/ilsapi/Draft+Recommendation > > Word: http://tinyurl.com/2bzrje > > -- > Emily Lynema > Systems Librarian for Digital Projects > Information Technology, NCSU Libraries > 919-513-8031 > [log in to unmask] > -- Jonathan Rochkind Digital Services Software Engineer The Sheridan Libraries Johns Hopkins University 410.516.8886 rochkind (at) jhu.edu