Library 2.0 - Like the idea, hate the term

I like the idea of "library 2.0" - that libraries need to evolve along with the changes in technology. That we are now in a new age where we can engage in lots of conversations, and technolgy can facilitate that (if we aren't destroyed by constant distractions).

But, I hate the term "library 2.0". It seems to say that libraries are just now getting to their second iteration. So, from the Library at Alexandria to Franklin's lending library to the Carnegie libraries and everything in library history until 2005 just counts as "library 1.0"? It would be more realistically library 12.4 or some such. Web 2.0 I don't have any problem with: from the first time I saw Mosaic until 2005, I can count as one version, but it is a slap in the face to millenia of library history and experience to just call it "library 2.0"

That said, no one outside libraryland will ever use the term "library 12.4" or whatever we calculate it to be. So, as a shorthand, "library 2.0" will suffice, and I will probably use it. But like "baby boomer" and "generation x" and "millenial", it is a term that grates on the nerves just a little bit.

So, until someone has a better, catchier term, I guess library 2.0 is it.