1. Linked Library Data Interest Group: Tools, Resources, Vocabularies, Data Sources Report from the subgroup on shared “webliography” development Laura Akerman ALA Midwinter, 2012-01-22

2. You asked for: Tools Resources We have “prototypes”. Linked Data Resources for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/159926 Linked Data Tools for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/159930 Linked Data Vocabularies and Data Sources for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/164608 Linked Data Resources for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/159926 Linked Data Tools for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/159930 Linked Data Vocabularies and Data Sources for Libraries http://connect.ala.org/node/164608 Want your feedback... Will you use it? What should we change? Before we have 500 things added...

3. Prototype on : Resources

4. Tools

5. Vocabularies/Data Sources

6. ????? Questions ????? Is a nice, small, somewhat static Webliography sufficient for us? – If we rely on volunteer editors to do it, time consuming, slow to get things in... Or, would a continuously updated, community created hub of information for libraries become more of a “Go-To Resource” ? TIMETOOLS TIME and TOOLS are the factors

7. ***Dream*** Interactive online “shared bibliography” – comment on each entry Multiple levels of organization – categories plus tagging, can sort by categories, title, date... Easy for anyone (or, anyone with a login) to add an item in any category (maybe editors watch over this a little..) Easy for anyone to add a comment directly related to an item, e.g. “We used this software.” “has some bugs which they’ve promised to fix in next release...” “Query response very fast” “New edition is out now” Feeds of new entries and comments via RSS or email Under the hood, the data and vocabs (e.g. “Who, Terms, When”) is harvestable Open Linked Data, of course! Free! No growth limit!

8. Reality -. Advantages – free to us (“us” could include anyone creating a login, but you have to wait a bit) – integrated with the LLDIG site, but accessible to anyone – Can organize the content how we want (if we have the time to highlight, move things around) – Has Comment feature Disadvantages: – Drupal editing interface is tricky, not “newbie friendly”; – Feels time-consuming to create links, etc. We don’t have a lot of extra time to give to this. – Don’t know about feeds – probably not... – Comment only at page level (“page per resource” not practical) – No tagging, no “sort by” – Somewhat inconvenient for non-ALA members (should this serve a bigger community than ALA?)

9. Possible...? Zotero group? Ex.: https://www.zotero.org/groups/libraries_and_linked_data/items https://www.zotero.org/groups/libraries_and_linked_data/items + Zot. Comes out of library community, not sure about feeds, many use it group? Ex.: http://groups.diigo.com/group/linked-datahttp://groups.diigo.com/group/linked-data + Easier interaction, comment at the item level (Diigo, Less organization, less control...Diigo has widgets to port new entries to blog, rss feeds, send daily/weekly updates via email - must manage membership; tagging only,no categories(?); limited sorting; no “stars” (?), commercial, no guarantees free forever... LITA wiki? http://wikis.ala.org/lita/index.php/Main_Page or, Semantic Mediawiki? Ex: http://semanticweb.org/wiki/Toolshttp://wikis.ala.org/lita/index.php/Main_Pagehttp://semanticweb.org/wiki/Tools + Wiki organization is tricky., but easier than Drupal, to me... Would more folks contribute? - Comment still not great (don’t like “Talk” pages) ? If Semantic, who would host, maintain? Mendeley, hon. mention (really about “papers”) Other? Please tell us about it!

10. Tell us what you’d like to see! Today: now Later: email liblna@emory.eduliblna@emory.edu Will discuss among Chair/Vice Chair and subgroup (Laura Akerman, Kevin Clair,, Tami Morse McGill, Yin Zhang, Annie Wu, Dan Lipcan, YOU?) and decide what changes, or not.