[HT: Peter Scott’s Library Blog]

European researchers working on the MOBVIS project have developed a new system that will allow camera phone users to hyperlink the real world. After taking a picture of a streetscape in an urban area, the MOBVIS technology identifies objects like buildings, infrastructure, monuments, cars, and even logos and banners. It then renders relevant information on the screen using icons that deliver text-based details about the object when clicked.

Take a picture, picture objects/surroundings identified by the “system”, you click on object of interest to get info about it.  I suppose this would eventually go “real-time” with combo of video/geolocation/sensor data.  “Computer – identify that thing in front of me!”

From ReadWriteWeb

The winning model will involve licensing content broadly such that the library licenses the materials, the professors assigns them and the student electronically checks them out of the library as they do hardcopy books

Fleshes out the following “misunderstandings”:

(1) "All OA is gold OA." 
(2) "Low levels of spontaneous self-archiving reflect opposition to OA."
(3) "OA archiving will kill journal subscriptions."
(4) "OA is about bypassing peer review."
(5) "OK, then, but OA journals skimp on peer review."
(6) "OK, then, but at least *green* OA is about bypassing peer review."
(7) "OA is about punishing greedy or obstructive publishers."
(8) "OA journals couldn’t possibly pay their bills."
(9) "OA is a business model."
(10) "All OA journals charge publication fees."
(11) "OK, then.  But all *high-quality* OA journals charge publication fees."
(12) "Publication fees at OA journals must be paid by authors out of pocket."
(13) "Publication fees at OA journals are just subscriptions in disguise."
(14) "OA deprives authors of royalties."
(15) "Preprint archiving violates copyright."
(16) "Postprint archiving violates copyright."
(17) "Self-archiving takes too much time."
(18) "Self-archiving hides work more than it exposes work."
(19) "OA invites plagiarism."
(20) "Authors must choose between prestigious publication and OA."
(21) "OA helps readers but not authors."
(22) "All OA is gratis OA."
(23) "OA is about providing access to lay readers."
(24) "OA makes sense for second-rate work, but not for first-rate work."
(25) "The current system is not broken."

The more I think about it the more obvious it’s becoming to me that the next generation of authoring/production tools will have much more in common with today’s software development tools than with today’s word processors.

Software developers spend enormous amounts of time creatively writing with text, editing, revising, refining multiple interconnected textual works — and often doing so in a highly distributed way with many collaborators. Few writers or editors spend as much time as developers with text, and it only makes sense to apply the lessons developers have learned about managing collaborative writing and editing projects at scale.