Why does “open” always mean “good”?

Citation

Poulter, A. (2010), "Why does “open” always mean “good”?", Library Review, Vol. 59 No. 9. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr.2010.03559iaa.001

Why does “open” always mean “good”?

Article Type: Guest editorial From: Library Review, Volume 59, Issue 9.

This special issue of Library Review, on open source applications in libraries, springs from a conference in London in 2009, entitled Open Libraries: Breaking the Barriers, at which a range of library management system (LMS) vendors gave presentations on how open source was seen by their company. Three of these papers are included here, in revised forms. Two are from specialised companies who support open source LMS, PFTS who support Koha and Equinox who support Evergreen. Ex Libris, who are not an open source supplier but who, nevertheless, are engaged in hybridising open source with their commercial software. My paper, which is an introduction to open source and its application in libraries, and precedes the conference papers, was written for this issue and gives a background for those new to the topic.

Since these conference papers are the supplier's views, to balance things two invited papers look at the use of open source by the Tennessee Regional Library System and a comparison of Koha (an open source LMS) and Evergreen by Bloomfield-Eastern Greene County Public Library. The final invited paper goes into details on a wide range of open source applications in libraries and makes a fitting conclusion to this issue.

Before we launch into the papers it might be useful just to reflect a little on the use of the term “open”. In common parlance, openness equates to honesty and is rightly valued. What does “open” mean in librarianship? Open access is perhaps the first concept that springs to mind.

In open access, academic literature, specifically, the peer-reviewed journal literature which is not written for royalties or any other direct monetary reward to its authors, is made available for free via the internet. While internet sites and digital data are cheap, they are not free and so some source of funding is needed to make open access happen. There also need to be agreements about copyrights, since presumably the authors of papers in open access repositories do not want others selling on these papers as their own, and nor do they want their authorship rights lost.

Linked to open access is the idea of open standards. Open standards in technology terms are specifications for how to accomplish particular tasks or build particular (tangible or digital) objects. Open standards cover everything from computer connections to metadata to the design and operation of websites. These specifications do not come free. Generally a “standards body” does the design work. This may be an ad-hoc collection of experts, a group of interested commercial and/or nonprofit entities within a domain, or a national or international organisation. Libraries have been actively building and supporting standards for years. The venerable MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) format dates back many years. Cataloguing, indexing and classification codes have been adopted by libraries, to create a “standard” expectation of a library service.

To a certain extent, open standards, open access and open source are linked. Open standards provide mechanisms for content storage and delivery. Open access provides content under a specific copyright regime (e.g. Creative Commons). Open source simply makes these two potentially even cheaper, by reducing software costs.

But a cost still remains. One of the reasons “open” has acquired this moral superiority is that it does not simply mean “open” as in accessible. It also means “free”. Now, everyone likes things that are free: air, walking through the countryside, reading a good book borrowed from a library or listening to live music on the radio. But, as we all know in our heart of hearts, nothing is ever really “free”. Radio stations need money from either advertisers or the public purse to run. Library books are paid for from local government funds, which come from local property taxes or other levies. Air still is free on the surface of the Earth, but venture high into the mountains or underwater and air then needs special equipment to “consume”. We must not forget that “openness” creates a powerful, but fragile, ecosystem for information and library services. Commercial libraries of all types (special, academic and public) still exist. Google might be thought of as an information search tool but that would be a mistake, as it is a tool for selling advertising and provides information only as a hook. Openness is good but it is not a part of the natural order of things. Please beware of this.

Alan PoulterDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK