just can't wait for 3.0

i have to grouse for just a little bit before i can get on to the glories of library 2.0.

case in point: i got in trouble for instant messaging at the information desk when i first came to KCLS. i came from another large public library system, where i had many friends and acquaintances across age level specialty and throughout the organization. several of these friends were in my instant messaging buddy list, and were far more available to me than kcls staff. working the information desk and having an instant message window open was not common there, but it was habit among my circle. we had libraries of various sizes, but were often alone on the desk if not the only librarian in the building. when faced with a question outside our expertise, we'd ask each other, getting answers for the patrons from someone across town, in the workroom, upstairs in the children's room, or anywhere else they might be logged in from (even home).

don't get me wrong, instant messaging is a social tool, and provides interpersonal contact in addition to (and precedence over) professional service in most cases, but now that it's all legitimate and 2.0, i wish the folks who reprimanded me would just say "hey, i had no idea what a visionary you were at the time, good on ya!" and no, i know we're not addressing instant messaging as part of this program, but it broke onto the KCLS scene during the course of it so it's fair game for comment.

one more small point: each of the five articles on this topic has at least one editing error, be it a left out word or disagreement between noun and verb, which make me wish they themselves were in wiki or perpetual beta so i could fix them and then focus more on what they say rather than how they say it.

i must not have had enough tea this morning.

ok, so, 2.0--i have heard more than once the mention of "perpetual beta" which i think must be accepted and acknowledged. this is absolutely critical. there can never be a final draft of anything, as i've seen in my recent experiences on the web page redesign advisory committee and the reader's advisory plan committee. even if there was just one week between meetings, the whole scope could change in the interim, leaving us sadly out of date no matter how open ended we tried to make things. we talked about blogging in both groups, while the blogging committee was meeting furiously at the same time, and things are going to be completely different after everything has been through the mandatory administrative approval (waiting) period.

catalog explorer already provides information about nearby resources (including KCLS databases and nearby library systems) but that needs to be expanded and explored. catalog explorer also provides some of the relevance ranking mentioned in one of the articles (i read all five), but could probably enhance that further as well. i'd like to see a search interface that could combine the concrete function of the classic catalog with the fuzzy yet often desired results of catalog explorer. now THAT would be cool.

so these ideas are great, and it would be good to explore them, but i don't know how we're doing so far and don't know where we're going with it. there are still lots of committees working on plans and policies and i don't see that going anywhere fast.