(Original photograph from the Freedom Over Texas Festival on July 4th)
I read several documents by creators and engineers for Web 2.0 while waiting for my daughter to go through her classes at Rice University's Summer Enrichment Program. There was so much interesting information on the first five of the readings that I took notes in order to comment. The readings clarify who is behind Web 2.0 and why, as well as future directions. First, Kirk Anderson (Away From the "Icebergs") presents a compelling argument in favor of updating literacy resources to primarily online materials. This is as we know already happening. In my case, it's not been a necessity to invest in technological tools that provide more than a computer, a telephone or music/podcasts. Now that I fear less the ocean of information out there I see the need for more sophisticated tools. Second, Michael Stephens (Into a New World of Librarianship) writes on "librarianship" and although he like Anderson has much of value to say, I will comment on one particular item: Controlling "techno-worship". Putting resources to the test gives teachers and librarians filters to assist with planning and implementing effective instruction via technology tools. Even the best of these tools, however, has its place in the classroom, right? Further, my daughter has used ipod Touch for a few years now as a toy and tool. Isn't it great to have knowledge and experiences that can be shared with each other, adding to personal moments with family members or students with talents in areas of technology? Third, Chip Nilge (To More Powerful Ways to Cooperate) writes about better Web 2.0 technologies, providing interesting information and provoking questions. He certainly discusses how the internet is getting more organized and efficient, at least it appears that way to me. What I'm curious about is Open WorldCat. Also, RSS has come in conversations on several occasions. I may have underestimated it? Fourth, John Riemer (To Better Bibliographic Services) discusses bibliographic services and the use of metadata. I can appreciate his comments on better ranking techniques of websites. In general, I feel like there is greater direction for managing resources and providing skills and tools and it is identified by key features by all the authors of the various readings. It's like moving to a better neighborhood. I wonder though, which types of personalities of the Myers-Briggs groups would be good candidates for helping "streamline metadata creation[s]" (if looking beyond the library sector as mentioned by Riemer)? Just think - blogging like this could save hours of searching for an answer to a nagging curiosity! Riemer mentions a single metadata creation effect? Order out of chaos...how can that be bad?