Here is the powerpoint for the presentation given to UM library faculty regarding the web technology conference I recently had the chance to attend in New York, Flash Forward 2003.Download file. The title of the talk was "Flash Forward 2003: Academic Library WebServices, Information Design and Technology Flashbacks". The wider goal was to present the technology in a longer ranging and information science oriented historical context. To better situate developments, the presentation discussed Interactive web technology and Academic Library Services through a historical optic. This was done to more widely situate 'Flash' and interactive media rich web technologies and to reflect on online library services through a more wide ranging historical contextualization of information design.
Fortuitously, this talk was given in tandem with Cheyl Gowing, ILS Systems Coordinator speaking on "Optimal Design Considerations for Web OPAC Interfaces" and Schlomit Schwarzer, Head of Access and Delivery Services presenting on new technological possibilities for Circulation and Reserves and research on the digitization of Judaic libraries, archives and special collections. Richly varied in subject matter and library science areas, all of the talks for this symposia opened a host of intersecting points of congruence/commonality with regards to 'online' and web directions for future reflection.
The Flash Forward talk tangentially dialogued with more than a few of the topics covered by both Cheryl and Schlomit from different perspectives. This talk also hopefully introduced this more technically oriented conference to a wider 'non-technical' audeince. The wider questions now also become, was it useful here to place Interactive media technologies in the context of wide ranging historical information design and academic library science perspectives? What is the resistences towards these technologies presented and what are their benefits? Finally, are there other lessons that history has to teach us with regards to information design, developmental trajectories and new technology?
Historically, what is the trajectory for development of information architecture with regards to libraries and large information systems? If we look back to the nineteenth century systematizers (Dewey, Ranganathan, Bliss, LCSH), we see attempts to systematize the universe of knowledge through the optic of on the one hand, mathematics, and, on the other, linear text based taxonomic systems. Dewey used the decimal system and 'base ten' to map knowledge. Ranganathan and Bliss used a somewhat more complex but less popular mathematical grouping system based out of the idea of facets (Ranganathan) and dimensions (Bliss). These facet-based or dimensional systems largely stood dormant during the twentieth century until lately when computer scientists began to take up these systems in terms of 'search engines' and databases. These possiblilities have been opened up by the web. This has also extended 'information architecture' to new visual paradigms regarding information visualization and motion graphics.
To step back, recent attempts such as Epinions and the William Blake Archive use Ranganathan's facet classificatory system in a text based method to generate more effective search engines. To move forward, the next generation of 'information' architectures will be 'visual' and 'dynamic' breaking away or out of a linear 'page' or strictly 'text' based paradigm or metaphor and taking advantage of the possibilities opened by the increased graphical processing power opened by the computer in tandem with the increased storage capabilities of the relational or object oriented database. Many attempts at these new 'information architectures' work largely within Flash, one of the first and still more powerful web based programs to combine a robust programmatic environment and backend database connective capability with the creative possibilities of a right brain visual design paradigm. What is interesting about innovators such as Joshua Davis, Yugo Nakamura, Eric Natzke and Jared Tarbell , John Maeda and David Small are that they are combining right brain visual paradigms with left brain programmatic/20th century mathematical possibilities to produce the next generation of visual and dynamic information architecture. What is also interesting is that these new architectures are not (with the exception of Maeda and Small) coming out of the high end of Computer Science programs but rather from the bottom up - right brain graphics renegades taking up high end mathematics and connecting this to the database.
The next stage becomes how can these 'visual experiments' or beta prototypes be translated and reinscribed for the purposes of larger academic library websites. This utility is necessary to deal with large datasets. The long scrolling lists of either 'books' or database articles is no longer effective to 'envision' and utilize these datasets. How can Tarbell or Nakamura or Davis's paradigms be remapped onto academic library webservices to create the next generation of the academic library?
In his work on the changing nature of academic libraries, library and information scientist Gary Marchioni advocates augmenting library services by changing the concept of academic library from repository to collaboratory and Sharium. In his paper, Marchioni's conceptions are undeveloped from the level of implementation but recently at FlashForward I was able to participate in an group experiment of implementing some 'people connecting' software called Intro that could readily be adopted to these purposes.
Essentially, how this software works is that a group of users enter their interests, academic background and various choices through an online profile. Intro then creates a visualized scatter plot of the universe of users clustering like minded individuals together and for the others to see. To take this into an academic library setting, users can then see who in the academic universe of knoweldge is taking out the same close 'subject category of books and has the same interests as themselves through a visualized graph of proximity. While participation in this application from an academic libraries standpoint would be voluntary, I can see Marchioni's idea of an academic sharium being realized through the application of this connecting tool or a remix of this conception in tandem with the libraries database of holdings. Ideally, the connections and patrons book choices would produce clusters of like-minded participants and encourage interdisciplinarity. Participants would be free to contact or e-mail each other through the shared purpose of academic dialogue and the free exchange of ideas.
At Flash Forward, attendees had the opportunity to try out this software in action and the results were promising. This now brings up the question, how are libraries changing from repositories and 'points of access of information' to community generating environments? Can technology augment and enhance this community providing connections in an academic setting for innovation, learning and discovery to be made?
In terms of e-reference, some of the new possibilities involving technology presented at Flash Forward were simply astounding. To outline this a little more, Flash Forward presented both vrchat or 3d chat rooms via Flash Comm Server and the possibility of Avatar based communication via a technology called Sitepal. Both of these technologies present the opportunity for the next generation of e-reference services via virtual environments, two way communication and avatar based chat to move e-reference from the command line to a more virtual/realistic medium specific environment.
To outline this further, perhaps it is best to look at the history of 'reference' services in a university academic library setting. Traditionally, reference occurs in a face to face, librarian/patron encounter. With the advent of the Internet, e-mail reference/question answering services were implemented. This is present at Richter and most university academic libraries. As the Internet progressed, chat rooms came into being. These multi-user environments were and still mostly are accessed through a single command line of text. Currently in Richter, this is the stage of implementation we are at with our Questionpoint software. Similarly, this is the stage of most if not all university library e-reference services. As opposed to a 'virtual' environment, people are reduced to lines of text. This has proved saleable as information 'companies' such as AOL have made their millions through 'chat' environments or online 'communities'.
Landscape: The next stage involves implementation of a visual component with environments created in entities such as http://www.thomasglyn.net/vrchat . What are the possibilities for this type of 'visualized environment' with regards to patron/librarian e-reference services? How can these visualized environments aid the information seeking process? Can our librarians be trained to work with or 'remix' these environments to provide better reference service? What are the possibilities for radically refiguring these environments with regards to 'information' seeking?
Figure: On another level, Sitepal provides avatar based communication possibilities. Instead of a command line of text, the 'patron' in a much more humanly recognizable way would be presented with an avatar or 'visual representation' of the librarian host. On this site, one can see a lot of 'television' talking head like representations used in 'e-learning' applications. This technology becomes really interesting when one scrolls to the "Wireless Platforms" demos. Imagine the possibilities for a hundred of these devices given out in an academic university library setting and the users allowed to peruse the stacks. What are the symbiotic possibilities? How can reference services be changed or enhanced, remixed, remodelled, transformed? Do we have the chance and opportunity here to create the next paradigm?
One of the more interesting simple yet complex applications presented at Flash Forward was the Zoomifyer. Essentially, the application allows one to zoom in on an image without losing resolution or the image becoming pixellated.
Traditionally, in large image archives or galleries a thumbnail of an image is downloaded in a reduced k and size version. To see a larger image, one clicks on the image and a second larger size image is downloaded and then a third etc.. A good example on Richter Library site is the Cuban Heritage Digital collection. Clicking on say "Havana 1900" produces a set of thumbnails and clicking on one of the thumbnails such as "Calle De Habana" produces a larger resolution image. This is traditionally how image archives have been set up with the more robust image archival galleries presenting three and sometimes four larger and higher quality image levels. The drawback of this method is that multiple images and page views must be saved increasing production and subsequent download time.
Zoomifyer's progressive download technology works fundamentally differently. Looking at something like the Getty Museum's archiving of their Early Flemish Manuscript Painting gives a good idea of how Zoomifyer's different approach to digitizing archival books and images can be achieved. A low res version of an image is downloaded but instead of clicking onto a larger image, Zoomifyer's technology allows one to progressively zoom in on the detail of interest within an image without losing resolution. The image does not become pixellated because the technology progressively downloads more and more of this image's information as needed also saving bandwidth because only that part of the image that is selected is downloaded. Another good example of this technologies use is on the Smithsonian's American history site thumbnailing various photographs of the aftermath of September 11. Now, how can university image archives leverage Zoomifyer's use of technology? What benefit would this fundamentally different method of searching and archiving images have for academic and university library sites? What are the advantages and disadvantages of both methodologies and is one fundamentally superior than the other.
I was able to represent University of Miami Libraries Flash Forward 2003 in New York. The conference is essentially a gathering of information architects, web developers, larger web site managers and webmasters interested in the next generation of the web: motion graphics, interactivity and multimedia. Most of the participants deal with large commercial and academic sites and/or clients. All have in common large information datasets, innovation and the challenges of dealing with libraries of information within architectures of 'web' services.
All participants at Flash Forward are committed to innovative web interfaces through a rich web experience currently expressed by the web technology Flash and valence of applications around it. What is interesting about Flash Forward is the divergent groupings of people that the conference brings together. On the one hand, there are right brain creative front end visual designers: art directors, multimedia designers, art and aesthetics people. On the other hand, there are also a significant contingent from traditionally left brain programmatic environments: programmers, software engineers, back-end database and systems integration people. While there are web designers, webmasters and developers attending, there are also non-traditional vocations such as medical researchers (MRI imaging), military people, 'architects' and engineers'. The realization from all parties is that a synthesis or union of high end mathematical methodologies with more visually inspired right brain creative and usable front end information architectures is necessary to push the web forward to its potential. At the conference, this synthesis is discussed on the level of implementation through the vector animation/programming tool - Flash.
The highlight of the conference is the flash film festival. Finalists from around the world compete within Cannes-like categories of web design: navigation, educational, motion graphics, technical merit, aesthetics, 3D, Video and Typography. You can see the finalists and winners of the New York festival here (click on 2003 Flash site, Flash Film Festival, Finalists). From the interfaces presented in the Film Festival, are there ideas and solutions to be remade, remodeled and remixed for the next generation of Richter? There are, but which are the more effective and interesting to pursue for academic library web services?
As we get ready for the next Richter library sitewide redesign, it is necessary to step back and survey the academic library website landscape. A larger sitewide redesign is a longer process a year in planning and implementation. Because of this, it is necessary to reflect on current and future web possibilities and explore what is currently out there. What is being done and what is being planned in other library and 'commercial' information oriented websites? Links regarding other 'innovative' library sites would be much appreciated and discussion regarding larger web trends in design would also be welcome here.
In embarking on an academic library sitewide redesign, it is necessary to explore aesthetic, technological but also information architecture possibilities. What are other leading edge library websites up to? How are they implementing new web technologies and web services? What technologies are they exploring? What is innovative and perhaps even visionary about their sites? Are there library sites out there that stand head and shoulders above the rest or have library sites in general missed the boat on the quick sea changes of web trends? This is not a bad place to list other 'library' sites that we think the web committee should take a peek at and critique or 'copy'. The politically correct postmodern term here is 'find dialogue with' or 'remix'. It's also not a bad idea to look at leading edge library sites such as the New York Public Research Libraries, MIT, The Library of Congress and the National Library of Canada. What kind of innovative web services are these library sites implementing on a digital level or conversely, where are they backward? Large institutional bureacracy has never been an arbiter of innovation, so where is the innovation and where should we at Richter be looking so we can lead in vision rather than follow?
Anybody finding really innovative academic, special or public library sites on the net that they think should be looked at more critically - please list them and give these links here. Similarly, anybody finding other cutting edge 'information architectures' or site designs that they think the web committee would benefit from looking at, please also list these.
Because the library website necessarily makes up a strong part of the library's marketing strategy, advertising examples would also not be inappropriate. What is important is to deconstruct the elements from these sites that could be later implemented into Richter's future design plan. What do you like and why? What radical innovation should Richter be the first to implement or 'improve' upon?
At Richter, we have a large staff and faculty of capable librarians dealing with a multitude of different technological aspects with regards to the library and its daily functioning and maintenance. The library website is used often and on a daily basis by a variety of different groups. From their own departments, most of the staff use the library website in a multitude of different ways from our patrons and users. At the same time, the library website is accessed differently by UM faculty and students with regards to their information seeking needs. As the library becomes increasingly technologically connected, what are the other possibilities for library web services with regards to an academic research library's purpose and designing web services for such diverse audiences? How is the academic library of the twenty first century transforming how we think about libraries?
How, as staff and library faculty, can we re-envision or imagine this transformation so Richter can lead the way with regards to technological innovation and information services? In beginning to think about library web services from the perspective of library faculty and staff, there is a necessity to step back and reflect on the larger processes of what we do on a daily basis. There is also a necessity to dream and reimagine visionary possibilities for the information that the library houses and the duties that we perform for our patrons. How do these duties aid in knowledge seeking and how could web services in a library interconnect or interact with the environment in which it is housed? Historically, the library has always been the centre of research for a university. How can we improve the inter-connectedness of academic disciplines through the library and specifically web services? Are there lessons for web services in a library to learn from history? Are there more chances for cross-fertilization or symbiosis between the computer databases and books in our stacks.
Our stacks stand underutilized while one has only to look at the main floor of computers to see that this internet connected room is always full. Could these two areas be better integrated through web services and reimagining the relationship of the stacks to the computers on the first floor? What will the library of the twenty-first century be like and how can we better serve the university populace through technology and library web services through better pathways to information?