2. Digital Libraries: Variety of perspectives and models Tefko Saracevic, Ph.D. School of Communication, Information and Library Studies Rutgers University New Brunswick, New Jersey, U.S.A. tefko@scils.rutgers.edu http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/people/ faculty/tefko.html

3. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 2 On the scene F Several different communities involved in digital libraries, each with quite different  perspectives, concepts, meanings in dealing  concentration, emphasis, approach F Many disciplines, institutions involved F National & global interest F Large research and developmental projects F Large operational projects F Large commercial undertakings

4. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 3 Why? F Evolution of information society  role of knowledge & knowledge records  importance to records in digital forms F Strategic place of information  to society, economy, future  strategic policies for support in many countries  digital libraries part of that strategy F Technological imperative  just the right time for application to DL

5. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 4 Basic problems addressed F Creating means & ways for dealing with & using human knowledge records in the new digitalized and networked world F What to do with the electronic “book”, journals, publications, images, sounds, assembly of data? F Problems are technical, organizational, managerial, social, legal, economic, cultural … F Digital revolution may be as far reaching as that created by Gutenberg & the printed book

6. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 5 What is a DIGITAL LIBRARY? F No single, all-encompassing answer F Several perspectives  from different communities - different agendas F Little communication among them F Coherent, integrating concept, approach not yet emerged - but do we need? F Complex problems in any approach  Many experiments; many experts & “experts” F Highly exciting & volatile area; big $$$$$

7. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 6 Criteria 1. User community 2. Digital collection 3. Organization - physical, intellectual 4. Interface - access, physical, intellectual 5. Delivery 6. Persistence

8. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 7 Research support: two models 1. Digital Libraries Initiatives approach:  seek & fund research topics, mostly in technological areas  Examples: u DLI 1 & 2 in the US u ERCIM DLI: DELOS working group 2. Collaboration seeking approach  involving different communities: libraries, publishers, institutions, users …  Germany: Global Info; UK: electronic libraries

9. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 8 Computer science, engineering F Concentrating on R&D F Technology centered  distributed & organized knowledge resources in electronic, digital formats u diverse types of information –texts, images, sounds, multimedia  new kind of distributed database services to manage unstructured multimedia resources F Important for infrastructure

10. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 9 Examples of research areas F Interoperability between heterogeneous collections F Data integration - text, video, sound; metadata F Network protocols and standards F Search engines & agents for searching, filtering, navigating, summarizing, integration F Visualization & other interactive technology  browsing large volumes of texts & imagery; display F Scaling R&D to large collections, applications

11. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 10 Widening scope of topics F In DLI 2 8 projects funded so far: u Document selection and expert problem solvers u Image filtering for medical information u Automatic reference librarians for the web u New techniques for humanities collections u Software data lbrary u DL classification system u Undergraduate education: –DL test bed for science education –Virtual skeleton for study in anatomy

12. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 11 Challenges F Interdisciplinarity absent  DL appropriated by computer science and engineering F Users and human issues absent  human centered design pushed as rhetoric only F Widening array of topics  how do they fit into a digital library concept?

13. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 12 Library perspective F Concentrates on institutions, service, practice  logical extension of libraries F Content, collection centered  Creation of digital collections u variety of materials u repositories of digital materials  Access to collections F Guided by service mission u various environments, user communities u various degrees of integration or separation

14. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 13 Revolves around Digital Library Federation (DLF) definition “Digital libraries are organizations that provide the resources, including the specialized staff, to select, structure, offer intellectual access to, interpret, distribute, preserve the integrity of, and ensure the persistence over time of collections of digital works so that they are readily and economically available for use by a defined community or set of communities.”

15. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 14 Several models F Digitizing model (mostly heritage model):  Large number in the U.S. - various institutions - e.g.: Library of Congress: American Memory Project: http://memory.loc.gov  libraries becoming publishers F Consortium model  National Digital Library of the Library of Congress u redefines mission “provide the widest possible access to knowledge & information for educating a free society.” F Comprehensive service model  Example: California Digital Library (CDL)

16. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 15

17. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 16 Illustration of use... My computer in Zagreb HiNet - impulses work Rutgers server CDL Through indexes to a journal Springer, Germany Found an abstract

18. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 17 Challenges F Integration between print and digital  mixing new digital technology with print, local with global; managing diverse resources - all difficult F Competition for scarce resources sharpening F Institutional & social adjustments not easy F Resistance, threats:  guerilla warfare within and nuclear annihilation without

19. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 18 Disciplinary perspective F Concentrates on collections & new forms of publishing in their area - discipline centered F Association model: u scientific & technical societies provide DL in their area u Example: ACM Digital Library u Public access to a certain parts u Subscription for full text - subscription library model F Disciplinary units model:  providing collection of information in their field e.g. u Brown University Physics Internet Resources  these are more link than DL - handbook model

20. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 19 Publishing perspective F Commercial digital publishing & library model u Example: Elsevier Science Direct –own & other journals, mostly digitized print journals –indexes, abstracts, online services –various subscription, access & delivery modes F Replacement of scholarly journal model u Example: e-Print archive –submission of reports, archiving, searching & free access to full text in various science fields; issue of peer review not resolved F Newspaper model: u Example Wall Street Journal Online –coupling with newspaper morgue & many other resources

21. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 20 Exchange of roles F Libraries and publishers had a well defined relation - now it is blurring  publishers have libraries  libraries started publishing  publishers provide server (“shelf”) space  licensing rather than ownership becomes predominant transaction mode F Newspapers discovered a new model  based on their strength of editorial processes

22. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 21 Policy perspective F Legal issues u copyright protection u database security u intellectual freedom u equity F Technical issues u standards u scaling u equity implementation F Above & beyond DL, but DL bring out

23. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 22 Futurists’ perspective F Concentrate on social future F Third wave centered  Manifestation of the World Brain F Universal access to organized world’s knowledge F Prophesies: Disappearance of libraries, books, librarians F Utopian to a large degree

24. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 23 Economic issues F Costs not insignificant - WHO PAYS?  Presently R&D support from agencies - but after? F Dilemma in library budgets  licensing of digital publications vs. subscriptions F Publishers’ economics for digital publications  approaches vary, not settled, even scared  even: who is a publisher? - lines blurring F Economics of digital libraries still up in the air  room for research & experimentation

25. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 24 Social issues F Individual: privacy protection; rights; obligations  role in information exchanges, work, needs; life... F Organizations: integration; changing structure F Traditional libraries: disappearing? changing? F Impact: on research, business, education? F Education: professional, continuing, general F Computing & society: growing disparity between information rich & poor

26. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 25 General opportunities F Building digital collections of national importance from existing texts, documents, images  historical, educational, strategic, legislative … F Creating new digital documents & linking them F Cataloging Internet resources in own domain F Selecting digital resources from wherever & creating & maintaining linkages F Developing/adapting search engines & other management tools for digital collections

27. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 26 General opportunities … continued F Providing access to digital collections F Integrating digital & other library collections  incl. integration of OPACs & library management tools F Establishing services for digital libraries  online access & offline support  education & training of users, and librarians F Addressing social, legal, policy issues F Cooperative national & international ventures F Outsourcing services; going into business of DL

28. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 27 Conclusions “War is too important a matter to be left to the generals.” Georges Clemenceau F Digital libraries are too important to be left to any one discipline, any one agency F Why? Work on digital libraries is defining the future of handling of human knowledge records F Caught a lot of interest globally & politically F They are also redefining the role of libraries in society & the role of librarians & inf. specialists

29. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 28 Conclusions … continued F Digital libraries provide challenge & opportunity for cooperative, interdisciplinary ventures F Provide a GREAT opportunity for many institutions to participate in many ways  Have room for smaller institutions & projects F Digital libraries will not replace libraries F But no matter what: libraries and information agencies cannot escape digital libraries, must change  so might as well actively join the movement

30. Tefko Saracevic, Rutgers University 29