續 文章翻譯：Re-defining the library

淺談! 挑戰! Flavour of the challenges (我不知道要怎麼翻啊)

當我開始準備這篇報告時-我前面是空白的銀幕，幾杯咖啡下肚，所有能做的替代活動都做光了- 我碰巧在家收到Information World Revew (2006)一月號的影印本的信。我需要來稍掃瞄一下在前幾頁的主題來指出我們面臨所面臨的挑戰，請容我與您分享：

*維基百科裡的科學文章正確性被「自然」期刊認可。其錯誤率並沒有明顯的高於百科全書。
*圖書館強力去擁抱第二代網路科技Web 2.0以滿足讀者需求，並聲稱現行的圖書館目錄標準和MARC與A39.50需要被XML科技取代，以讓更多的網路服務能利用並被檢索，圖書館目錄已被與Amazo與Google相比較。
*Open Access的議題在科學界已走到二個不同的方向，科技與醫學出版商，哈佛大學、Blackwell出版商，Springer都已簽定 Wellcome Trust Open Access模式，而荷蘭(Elsevier,Wolters Kluwer)和北美(Wiley, Sage)持續對Open access 無動於衷。
*Michael Gorman認為浪費錢而把學術資料數位化過程搧了一巴掌，正當德國圖書館館長Elisabeth Niggemann主張不論是公眾或是私人都要進行以讓更多人能檢索利用館藏。
*Apple在英國倫敦Regen街上的旗鑑店正為圖書館計劃一個模式，讓他譬能重新塑造空間與提供的服務來鼓勵知識交換與解決資訊目題。


也有個今年的評論(Chillingworth, 2006)-2005年震撼你世界的故事(The Stories that Rocked your World in 2005) - 這只是個題目的樣本來指出在僅僅12個月裡的所表現出的複雜性與變化性。

在2005年的一月，Google宣佈它要把五個主要圖書館館藏數位化的計畫，包括了哈佛，接下來包括Yahoo與微軟的Open Content Alliance(OCA)計劃，大英圖書館/微軟同意把數以萬頁計的資料數位化。Macmillans出版社與Bookstore一起參與數位化，出版商和作者以違反版權的法律打擊Goolge，然後Amazon宣佈一項可以以頁、章節來買書的新服務。數位化從來沒有像現在成為這麼熱門的議題過! 內文也許真的是王道，至少現在是如此。

但是在英國Bangor大學的主題館員被受到威脅，與網路相比，他們不被認可有提供足夠的貢獻，並而在科學博物館的圖書館在面對財務危機時就被關閉了。




----

When I was starting to prepare for this paper – blank screen in front of me, several cups of coffee drunk and all possible displacement activities completed – I happened to receive the January 2006 copy of Information World Review (2006) through the post at home. I needed to look no further than scanning the topics of the first few pages to indicate a flavour of the challenges we face. Let me share a few with you:

* the accuracy of Wikipedia articles on science is validated by Nature. The error level is not significantly greater than levels in Encyclopaedia Britannica;
* libraries are urged to embrace the second generation of Internet technology Web 2.0 to satisfy user demands, saying that existing library catalogue standards, such as MARC and Z39.50 need to be replaced by XML technology, enabling access to information from a wide variety of web services; library catalogues are compared unfavourably to Amazon and Google search services;
* the now rather done to death topic of open access is covered with a suggestion of a split between science, technology and medicine publishers, Oxford University Press, Blackwell Publishing and Springer all of whom have signed up to the Wellcome Trust Open Access model; and the Dutch (Reed Elsevier, Wolters Kluwer) and the North Americans (Wiley, Sage) who appear to be steadfastly unmoved by open access;
* Michael Gorman slams digitisation of scholarly texts as a waste of money while Elisabeth Niggemann, Director of Die Deutsche Bibliothek urges both public (European Union) and private sector investment to ensure wider access to collections; and
* Apple's flagship store in Regent Street in London is projected as a model for libraries as they reshape space and service provision to encourage knowledge exchange and solving information problems.

There is also a review of the year (Chillingworth, 2006) – The Stories that Rocked your World in 2005 – and just a sample of topics is indicative of the complexity and rapidity of change within our information world over just 12 months.

In January 2005 Google announced its plans to digitise the collections of five major libraries, including the Bodleian at Oxford. Later initiatives include the Open Content Alliance (OCA) with Yahoo and Microsoft; the British Library/Microsoft agreement to digitise millions of pages; Macmillans joined the digitisation goldrush with BookStore; publishers and authors hit Google with lawsuits around copyright violation, and Amazon announced a new service to change the model to purchase book content by the page or chapter. Digitisation has never been such a hot topic! Content may really be king, at least for a little while!

But in the UK subject librarians were being threatened with redundancy at Bangor University; they were not considered as offering value for money compared with the net; and at the Science Museum the library collections were to be split up in the face of a financial crisis.

Regulatory and legislative issues pertaining to the digital environment surfaced strongly. In the UK the Freedom of Information Act came into force; in a year when terrorist bombs struck in London, terrorism was never far from the headlines with new legislation on police powers and criminal evidence and a new terrorism bill all threatening to compromise librarians and their normal business activities. And as the year ended the UK government announced a fundamental review of intellectual property in the digital environment to take place in 2006.