It is quite interesting to know about Library 2.0 and I made a search on articles .I have found an interesting article on the subject .This article titled “ Library 2.0 Theory: Web 2.0 and Its Implications for Libraries“ is written by Jack M. Maness.
Definition
According to Miller (2005a), “Library 2.0” is a term coined by Michael Casey on his LibrayCrunch blog. Though his writings on Library 2.0 are groundbreaking and in many ways authoritative, Casey (2006a) defines the term very broadly, arguing it applies beyond technological innovation and service. In addition to Casey, other blogging librarians have begun conceptually exploring what Library 2.0 might mean, and because of this disparate discussion with very wide parameters, there is some controversy over the definition and relative importance of the term. The nature of this controversy Lawson (2006), Peek (2005), and Tebbutt (2006) explore and begin to adequately rectify, and Crawford (2006) provides a very thorough account of the ambiguity and confusion surrounding the term, partially suggesting that there is nothing inherently novel about the idea. Wikipedia defines Library 2.0 as a loosely defined model for a modernized form of library service that reflects a transition within the library world in the way that services are delivered to users. The concept of Library 2.0 borrows from that of Business 2.0 and Web 2.0 and follows some of the same underlying philosophies. This includes online services such as the use of OPAC systems and an increased flow of information from the user back to the library.”
Jack M. Maness also elaborates on the theory for Library 2.0. I think this discussion will be enriched by adding some notes on Library 2.0 theory.”A theory for Library 2.0 could be understood to have these four essential elements:
· It is user-centered. Users participate in the creation of the content and services they view within the library’s web-presence, OPAC, etc. The consumption and creation of content is dynamic, and thus the roles of librarian and user are not always clear.
· It provides a multi-media experience. Both the collections and services of Library 2.0 contain video and audio components. While this is not often cited as a function of Library 2.0, it is here suggested that it should be.
· It is socially rich. The library’s web-presence includes users’ presences. There are both synchronous (e.g. IM) and asynchronous (e.g. wikis) ways for users to communicate with one another and with librarians.
· It is communally innovative. This is perhaps the single most important aspect of Library 2.0. It rests on the foundation of libraries as a community service, but understands that as communities change, libraries must not only change with them, they must allow users to change the library. It seeks to continually change its services, to find new ways to allow communities, not just individuals to seek, find, and utilize information. “
So what can be learned?
“With Library 2.0, library services are constantly updated and reevaluated to best serve library users. Library 2.0 also attempts to harness the library user in the design and implementation of library services by encouraging feedback and participation. Proponents of this concept expect that ultimately the Library 2.0 model for service will replace traditional, one-directional service offerings that have characterized libraries for centuries”.(Wikipedia)
