So far from the readings I don’t think anyone has a complete definition of a digital library, though the Kuny and Cleveland do a decent job of defining it by defining what it isn’t. They say the internet isn’t a digital library, and I agree with them it isn’t. They then go on to debunk some other myths about the digital library which help frame what a digital library isn’t, but they don’t really get close to defining what it actually is.. From all of the readings I have found that it can be ok to have a loose definition of what a digital library is, since there seem to be so many, as long as it has a few common characteristics (which in turn, I guess could define what one is). I think minimally a digital library should be:
1. Digital. (kind of the defining term here and a “no brainer,” but it separates it from a print library)
2. Serve a defined community. It has to be relevant to someone.
4. Be more than one entry. Just like one book isn’t a library collection, neither is one entry a digital library collection.
3. Have fast, effective, efficient and free access. This one takes away the internet argument because the internet really isn’t that efficient.
There probably are a few more, but I think intrinsically these four should be met for something to be a digital library. I got some of these from Schwartz, but I don’t think all of the items she lists are necessary for something to be a digital library.
I also think there is a tough time defining what a digital library is because of the two main viewpoints, which came up in the readings, of who is defining it. It is defined differently depending on if it is a programmer or a librarian defining it.