Reading Assignment #4
Database Article (Wikipedia): A good overview and introduction to databases.
--Interesting to see that throughout the decades each person who develops a new system generally is dissatisfied with the previous decade’s advances. The feeling of, “They did it good but I can do it better” is really rampant sometimes. Never realized at times how competitive this field really is until I started studying the readings more closely. (It makes Microsoft’s foothold in the market impressive from a certain point of view.)
--I remember when COBOL was the dominant language. Back in 1984 when I started high-school my computer teacher was teaching us some of the basics of it because that was what everyone was using at that time.
--I see where the Relational Model is being used in our library, because the minute I saw “SQL” I realized that is what we use for our Rapid ILL system.
--With Object-Oriented databases seeking to bring the database world and the application programming world closer together it seems as though that is where the next major break-through lies.
--The article talks about the legislation in the United Kingdom protecting unauthorized disclosures of personal information on databases, but what about the United States? What legislation is in place for our protection?
Introduction to Metadata: The article is written in a way that when Gilliland gets too technical she provides a good example to help simplify things for the average reader.
--Never realized how much we in the Library Sciences are dependent upon the services that Metadata provides. Especially those in the Archiving end of the Library Sciences.
--Reading through Table 1 and seeing technical terms being applied to things that I use all the time and take for granted helps me gain a greater understanding for how complex and specialized this field really is.
--Library metadata has been in use since the 1960’s makes me wonder how things have really changed since then. We used to have room-sized computers and now we have Blackberries, I wonder about the changes since then. It was also interesting to read that the development of Library metadata has been first and foremost about providing access to content. Much like we do in the real world.
--Gilliland writes, “It is possible to conceive of it being used in an almost infinite number of new ways to meet the needs of non-traditional users, for multi-versioning, and for data mining.” I wonder what new ways we could be looking at for non-traditional users.
Dublin Core Article: Provides a good overview of the on-going project.
-- I wonder what progress they have made since this article was written 9 years ago and much of the last couple of paragraphs discussed work that still needed to be done. We can only assume tht they have made some progress by now.
--Thought the term “resource” was interesting from the perspective of it is not only including data and things of a computer nature, but also books and people as well.
--When Miller began to write and discuss computer coding I was somewhat surprised that in-order to understand it I had to use things that I learned in my logic course almost 20 years ago. The graphic at the end of the article really brought that point home for me. (I should write my logic professor a thank you note someday).
--Dewey Decimal is still being used in some places. I don’t think I could handle having to use it again.
Muddy Question: The Wikipedia article discusses the “A-C-I-D rules” They sound very stringent and straight-forward. However right after the explanation it says that many databases relax these rules for better performance.
My question is: When is it appropriate to relax these rules? How is it decided which rules are relaxed? And if they are relaxed every so often then why call them rules at all? Why not call them guidelines?
Blogs where I have posted:
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4619180577856147392&postID=6564099702343520457&page=1
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4181925387762663697&postID=4607901818617335487&page=1
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5671000685629389967&postID=889897992883147029&page=1
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=4527425204800506090&postID=4985219821099945805&page=1
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1003426038996200615&postID=1300285221863047449&page=1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I agree with you about the second article offering useful examples to root this abstract terminology in everyday (if you work in a library) practice. This problem of language is, in my opinion, one of the fundamental elements of the "digital divide". Whereas most people learn fairly well in a hands on way, very intimidating and unintelligible terminology pushes them out of the text.
As to Dewey: My library used it making me very comfortable with it as a user. Maybe if I cataloged I would have complaints, but at this point I need to brush up on my LOC categorizations.
Sean,
At our library we just switched over to LC in 2003 and if there is anything with Dewey on it then it is quickly given to cataloging.
Kind of like, "You didn't see this!"
Hi Jim,
I see you are in Chambersburg. I am familiar with the area as I used to be in Waynesboro a lot!
Anyway, the DCMI article makes sense when you think of linking or thats how I looked at it. AWWWW...Logic....no more truth tables written out for me. That class was at least interesting in college, lol!
Hey Lauren,
For me suddenly I have no reason why but as I read the DCMI article it was the rules of inference just started "kicking in" for me.
The whole "If____ Then___" suddenly came back to me...and I thought it wouldn't be useful after I passed the course....silly me!
Jeremy
I never realized or even thought about how competitive the field is either - until I read your blog. And it does make more sense now to see MS foothold as impressive - although I always just looked at them as the giant who had it easy to keep ahead of everyone else. So thanks for bringing something new into thought from some readings that were quite dry.
I was muct struck by your social commentary: i hadn't thought about the databases used to collect info about us, i was thinking entirely on an academic level (or possibly a better word would be naive?). Anyway, better metadata would make marketing even easier, and i shudder to think of the "legal" ramifications for most of us small-time sinners.
I was absolutely comfortable with a use of "Resources" that included people, and have even used it that way myself, but your noting it has suggested some really negative potential consequences that could follow thinking of people in such completely economic terms. I know the business world already does it and people rarely think twice about it, but if libraries start putting a tag on people as resources and evaluating their cost, I don't see how a library staff of 7 or 8 (2 or 3 librarians and 3-5 library assistants) can win when compared to a bunch of computers and a help desk with 1 or 2 people, and a centralized IT dept.
Maggie,
It really wasn't my intention to make a social commentary just asking from a perspective of wanting information.
However now that I re-read what I wrote I can see your point of view and agree with it because I always have this strange feeling of "being watched." Paranoia is an ugly thing.
Post a Comment