Friday, September 17, 2004I don't think that word means what you think it means
Confusion over open-source.
OCLC's 2004 Information Format Trends Report discusses the "top trends in content and what they may mean for libraries in the next five years".
One of the key trends listed is "Legitimacy of open-source publishing (e.g. blogs)".
Since when did blogs become open-source? (OK, I'm sure some of them are, but that's not a defining characteristic of the software). Later on, it becomes clear that the report is talking about open content, and social publishing. Which is somewhat different. Their definitions here are vague, as well.
Similar experience recently in class. My lecturer was explaining that libraries have been slow to use open-source software for OPACs and ILSs because they don't want their data to be available for just anyone to access. Funny, I thought it was the source code of the software that was available in open source, not the data that you entered into a particular open source application.