Reference Extract - Latest Comments

Re: The Idea in Detail

free slots — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:55:16 -0000

I think it would be best to build your own search engine but filter in some of the results generated from the other prominent search engines.

Re: What’s in a Name?

Quad Core Imac — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:28:54 -0000

REX sounds the best.

Re: The Idea in Detail

sdcastelan — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 01:29:09 -0000

great idea. just what i'm looking for. i'm a paid article writer. it takes a bit of research just for one article alone, and i want to write several articles in one day, to get paid more, obviously.
anyway with a reference extract, i will be able to use quality content from short extracted material combined from references such as encyclopedias, dictionaries, etc. this is better than extracting generalized content from sources generated from the normal search engines. pls. keep me posted when you have a beta version of this, i would love to test it.
thanks

Re: The Idea in Detail

sharon — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 01:21:22 -0000

great idea. just what i was looking for. i'm a paid article writer. just one article alone takes a bit of time to research, and i want to move on to write another article in the same day, of course to make more money. anyway with a reference extract, from library resources, my research will be done a lot quicker, and the content will be of a higher quality, than extracting generalized content from resources generated through the normal search engines

Re: What’s in a Name?

caleb — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:09:08 -0000

How about you get all Harry Potter and call it REFRO EXTRACTUM! ????

Seriously, I think any name is fine as long as you get rid of those huge, pixelated tweezers.

Re: What’s in a Name?

Rob Mientjes — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:32:29 -0000

What about FELIX?
- FEderated LIbrary eXplorer.
- Also the name of a wise cat who is very curious ...
- In Latin Felix means 'luck' ...
- 'Ask FELIX' sounds nice ...
Remark:
This name is also partly used for a federated search engine in the Netherlands powered by WebFeat (Fontys FELIX). I suggested this name. I don't know weather it is allowed to used it again in another context.
Fontys FELIX > http://wfxsearch.webfeat.or...

Re: What’s in a Name?

Mien — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:58:45 -0000

REX is also a dinosaur. Not likely to compare with a search engine.

Re: What’s in a Name?

NunoH — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:57:04 -0000

Rex is a dog's name and Reflex suggests nothing connected to libraries...

I would suggest Request or any name connected to librarians and libraries in general.

Re: The Idea in Detail

dcoulter — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:41:12 -0000

What ever happened to subject headings?

Re: What’s in a Name?

brian fidler — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 01:45:47 -0000

from a branding perspective I think REX is simple, easy to remember, could be easily personified, and would be very memorable. The only possible downside is possible confusion with DEX Yellow Pages.

I do like Michael_H's suggestion: Reflex but I still think REX is more memorable.

That said, REX may be the easy solution, I'd look deeper and brainstorm around both the words reference and extract to see what else I could come up with. For instance Extract could be distilled into Vanilla, but your service isn't Vanilla. What do you extract from a librarian? knowledge...what about Vaknowledge. or Vaniledge. just trying to spur the creative process ;) good luck!

Re: The Idea in Detail

MICHAEL J. SCHMITZ — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:53:23 -0000

AND ANYONE ELSE THAT SEARCHES FOR ANSWERS. HAVE A NICE DAY. MIKE

Re: The Idea in Detail

rdlankes — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:37:13 -0000

Right now we're exploring everything as part of the planning process. Certainly, the idea now is to build a general purpose utility that could work with other search engines as well as building one of our own.

Re: The Idea in Detail

Tom Hohenstein — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:24:07 -0000

Any thoughts about working with an already established search engine?

Re: What’s in a Name?

Michael_H — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:42:18 -0000

The most obscure pop culture reference would be REX - after "Rex Libris", the intergalatic crimefighting librarian superhero of fairly limited comic book fame.

However, REFLEX sounds more memorable and for once, an acronym quite close to the actual meaing. Reflex can have similar meaning to "reflection" which hopefully goes into the results.

Re: The Idea in Detail

rdlankes — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 21:44:22 -0000

I would first refer you to the other comments about this not being an attempt to put Google out of business. I suppose we are being optimistic that there is still room for improvement in Internet search. After all, as you say, the area will continue to evolve over the next 5-7 years. The hope of this project is that the experiences of libraries accumulated over - well -centuries, may play a part in how that evolution takes place.

Take the holy grail of "local" in the search world. Search engines want to be able to take advantage of location to offer better results. Libraries are built on a distributed local model. While many have seen this as a disadvantage in the past, these days it begins to look like an asset. Is there a way to take advantage of the over 120,000 libraries in the US alone to identify unique local resources, conversations, and thinking, and then bring that to a network scale? Add to this the benefit of libraries being seen as a credible and trusted source as well, and one can easily see partnerships with Google, and Yahoo! and Hakia that benefit them and the user alike.

Your point is well taken that there are obvious established players in Internet search. Will you also take that there are other well established players in the information industry beyond the Internet itself that may have something to offer? After all, who did Google partner with in their book search project? The point of Reference Extract is not to take down Google, or Yahoo or whomever. It is to ultimately tap the power of centuries of knowledge, skills, and expertise to improve how credible information is found on the web.

I appreciate you keeping us honest. However, I also hope you'll appreciate that while it may be vanity to think big, it is also very necessary. Remember that Google itself started as two guys with an idea going against established search engines like Alta Vista. The web itself started as a better way to link citations online than gopher. Thinking big is necessary. If we continue to look at big players and assume that their market size equates with a lack of need for innovation, we are in danger of the worst kind of complacency. Do I want to take down Google? No, but I do think it could be better. I also want to be part of lifting up libraries that are a vital social good, and a necessary part of today's information landscape.

Re: The Idea in Detail

richard — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:52:58 -0000

Good Lord. The wheel already having been invented, why feel that we can do better? It's hard to see how this amounts to much more than a vanity project for the participants- likely to produce a welter if invitations to conferences, but with a snowball's chance in hell of ever amounting to a product that will be embraced by librarians and certainly never by the public. This week Google announced that it topped 75% of the search engine market share! Presuming that this project produces anything at any point within the next 5-7 years, which seems like the model for this type of committee-driven development project, it stands little chance of being in sync with wherever search engine technology will be then. Hakia.com has already tried to claim this area of the search engine spectrum, and they're lovely, helpful people, but their engine came (and went?) with nary a ripple.

Re: Reference Extract in the Press

rdlankes — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:00:32 -0000

Barbara Quint does a great overview at:

http://newsbreaks.infotoday...

Re: What’s in a Name?

Tom — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 01:41:42 -0000

Hi,

I'm just a student of language - Try Reflex Library Extract which gives the acronyme REFLEX which is relevant ane easy to remember

tomdennen@gmal.com

Re: The Idea in Detail

rdlankes — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 07:50:30 -0000

It would be an interesting thing to test. First, how many users are willing to rate sites on a continuous basis, and second how the aggregation of these rankings are perceived. We have data that shows that many people when they worry about credibility still seek out credible sources. While for many this is friends and colleagues, the question becomes how to build a general utility. Here credible populations like librarians seems a solution (or else we wouldn't be doing this). Now what might be really cool, of course, is to combine the ability to get authority recommendations with personalization features.

Re: The Idea in Detail

Jenna — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 05:02:36 -0000

I think it's easier and more acceptable to rely on users for rating sites when it comes to online resources. I have this idea in my mind which is to integrate search engine with bookmarks and communities. Users can get more commonly liked sites by the number of users who bookmarked them, and more specialized ones within their own community. I don't know whether it would actually work out as I expected, but I am looking forward to it and plan to further my understanding in this area by pursuing my graduate study in an ischool in the US.

Re: The Idea in Detail

Amalaha — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:01:39 -0000

For the first time librarians will be in the driver’s seat and I am looking forward to following the progress of this project.

The experts among us will agree that for the project to succeed, it has to move away from the traditional and general web search with vague or questionable answers. Each search has to yield meaningful and properly documented results. There has to be a concentrated effort to identify authoritative sources. Beyond secondary sources, attention must be given to primary materials. Currently online and important are oral history--interpretations, translations, interviews; eyewitness newspaper reports; dissertations; and historic books. In addition, digitized archival collections (correspondence, photographs, unpublished papers, etc.) are “going live” everyday.

This is a new day for librarians and information managers.

Best wishes

Okezie Amalaha

Re: The Idea in Detail

Erin — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:46:04 -0000

I agree that the name and logo need to be changed. My first thoughts were also medical and unpleasant. Like Beck, see it as a make or break issue for a product that will be competing with the giants of Google and Yahoo. We have found the short ALA publication "Creating Your Library Brand" to be very helpful in our current re-branding process.

Re: Reference Extract in the Press

Sean Hecking — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:52:25 -0000

It seems like this will aid search engines in determining a site's value. We have wikipedia as a collective authority on websites. Would this be similar to a wiki?

Re: The Idea in Detail

Hope Leman — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 22:03:33 -0000

Go, librarians go! Get those grants!!

Re: Reference Extract in the Press

Eric Ward — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:06:09 -0000

More coverage:
Revenge of the Linking Librarians
http://www.ericward.com/bes...