<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><!-- generator="b2evolution/2.4.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>shimenawa - Latest comments on Book Search as a product</title>
		<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php?disp=comments</link>
		<description></description>
		<language>en-US</language>
		<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://b2evolution.net/?v=2.4.2"/>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Book Search as a product</title>
			<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 04:19:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Adam Hodgkin [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c54542@http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/</guid>
			<description>In the end Google Book Search may work best as index and as a search tool because it enables us to obtain access to many different reading and writing styles, and to search books in a variety of digital manifestations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
More on why we should not be expecting Google Book Search to be an ideal reading system.&lt;br /&gt;
http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/06/is-google-good-for-writers.html</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[In the end Google Book Search may work best as index and as a search tool because it enables us to obtain access to many different reading and writing styles, and to search books in a variety of digital manifestations.<br />
<br />
More on why we should not be expecting Google Book Search to be an ideal reading system.<br />
http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/2008/06/is-google-good-for-writers.html]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php/2008/06/20/book_search_as_a_product#c54542</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Book Search as a product</title>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Eoin Purcell [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c54532@http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/</guid>
			<description>Interesting thoughts Peter.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I agree with you about not using GBS as a search and find tool. In fact, I'm far more likely to use amazon, LibraryThing or The Book Depository.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I've downloaded the text of a few books I have wanted to read but mostly, the text versions aren't great and you are better of with Gutenberg if you can find them there.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I'm intrigued by your thoughts on the interface that best suits the search.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Now to get thinking about what you have written!&lt;br /&gt;
Eoin&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Interesting thoughts Peter.<br />
<br />
I agree with you about not using GBS as a search and find tool. In fact, I'm far more likely to use amazon, LibraryThing or The Book Depository.<br />
<br />
I've downloaded the text of a few books I have wanted to read but mostly, the text versions aren't great and you are better of with Gutenberg if you can find them there.<br />
<br />
I'm intrigued by your thoughts on the interface that best suits the search.<br />
<br />
Now to get thinking about what you have written!<br />
Eoin<br />
<br />
]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php/2008/06/20/book_search_as_a_product#c54532</link>
		</item>
				<item>
			<title>In response to: Book Search as a product</title>
			<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:52:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Edward Vielmetti [Visitor]</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">c54530@http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/</guid>
			<description>Google Book Search is best for pre-1922 materials; your example from the 1930s hits the GBS dead zone, where nothing is available full-text or even limited text, and the snippets are just frustrating.  It doesn't get better until you reach popular works in print.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
For pre-1922, GBS gives you some sense for what is available, but even with that it's nowhere near complete.  Finding something there for me generally leads to a next step of figuring out which library has it, so that I can go to their real collection.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
This is the best account I know of how GBS changes scholarship:&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
http://landscape.blogspot.com/2007/03/how-google-books-is-changing-academic.html&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
if your uses don't match that your experience will be different!</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[Google Book Search is best for pre-1922 materials; your example from the 1930s hits the GBS dead zone, where nothing is available full-text or even limited text, and the snippets are just frustrating.  It doesn't get better until you reach popular works in print.<br />
<br />
For pre-1922, GBS gives you some sense for what is available, but even with that it's nowhere near complete.  Finding something there for me generally leads to a next step of figuring out which library has it, so that I can go to their real collection.<br />
<br />
This is the best account I know of how GBS changes scholarship:<br />
<br />
http://landscape.blogspot.com/2007/03/how-google-books-is-changing-academic.html<br />
<br />
if your uses don't match that your experience will be different!]]></content:encoded>
			<link>http://blogs.lib.berkeley.edu/shimenawa.php/2008/06/20/book_search_as_a_product#c54530</link>
		</item>
			</channel>
</rss>
