15.

Although the articles could have used some less pretentious vocabulary and needed to get to the point more quickly, there were a number of masked tips on how to use the library in conjunction with all of the tools provided by new technology. Many of them are practical and logical steps in combining useful tools to make the searching process easier for patrons. My favorite example is this:
Libraries should get much greater mileage out of the metadata they create. For example, if geographic names embedded in the middle of subject headings are mapped to latitude and longitude coordinates, it becomes possible to present users with graphical means of searching by place, new ways of easily asking for materials about nearby places, and hierarchical browsing by place.

I would think that google maps works just as well as latitude and longitude, the concept is the same. It's the next logical step in the development of easy-inter-library-loans. I hear that on average, every inter-library-loan costs the library $8. This price is totally unacceptable as it is possible to BUY books on amazon and have them shipped to your house for that price. If the process of finding and ordering the ILLs became more manageable, the cost of each would significantly drop.

This was not nearly the only useful suggestion made in the Library 2.0 articles, but the process of making them a reality is another story altogether. Changing the make up of our bibliographic records is a time-consuming and expensive process. Many (board members) may believe that it is a superfluous step in the process of becoming a more technologically integrated library system. Who knows? Maybe I'm wrong and administrators would jump at the chance to evolve. I hope that that's true.