Future of Libraries Discussion
This session posed a few key questions to the group and asked us to think about hte year 2023. We were asked to ponder --
WHAT IF...
-- There were 100,000,000 free full-text books
-- Copyright legistation were completely rewritten to more reasonably reflect real world practices
-- Star Trek-level reference were really available
What I found most interesting was how difficult it was for a room full of librarians to think beyond today's technology. Any mention of information implants or anything close to AI was immediately poo-poo'ed. The conversation focused on how we stay relevant despite a couple of non-librarians in the audience trying to explain that we may not be already.
Topic Mapping
I didn't get to stay long for this one as I had to hit the session below, but I found the intro highly interesting. It is essentially a way to aggregate index information instead of focusing on full-text and create new access points. This is an area I'm going to have to look more indepth at when I get home.
Tagging the Catalog & Keyword in Headings
This session showed two concepts. First it demonstrated how heading data could harvested and allow keyword searching to actually pull a relevant list of subjects back. IE. User does a search for Civil War and instead of getting "no hits", they get back a list of all of the subject headings that include the words Civil and War. Second, it showed the value of allowing users to tag their own items. "Users are no longer passive." This allows an additional access point. Tags allow for "changes as language changes". One unique implementation of this was providing students of a method of finding all items from a specific professor.
Showing posts with label OPAC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OPAC. Show all posts
October 05, 2007
April 23, 2007
When simple might be too simple...
My library is in the process of redesigning the search interface for the OPAC. This is a process done by committee and was started long before I got here. They've rolled it out via a Preview button right now and have put methods there for feedback. Naturally, I'm giving it a test.
Currently, I use the OPAC rather than the ILS client to search for titles currently held (title searching), authors (author browsing), and to see what we have in various subject areas (subject browsing). What is currently being re-done, with Google-like visions, is the Simple Search. Sadly, this is where the current browse feature resides. The new simple search will be one search option only (Catalog Search) and that is over the entire record. Advanced search is still there, but it does not have the option to browse. So, when the OPAC is rolled out (unless they change it based on feedback and I did give feedback), users will no longer have the ability to browse subjects or authors.
I was aghast. It's second nature to me to subject browse and always has been, even before I became a librarian. Maybe it's because I learned to do research with a card catalog and print indexes. These force you to think in terms of subject. When I worked the reference desk and a student wanted information on a particular subject, I showed them how to do a subject search and most were quite pleased when they learned they could could search this way.
Bananas is a search I recently did, but I was looking for titles related to the banana trade, marketing, economic factors, etc. A search in the "Simple Search" box for bananas, netted 40 hits. Not overwhelming. Near the top of the list is Language, bananas and bonobos : linguistic problems, puzzles and polemics by Neil Smith; the only assigned subject is Linguistics. Bananas is simply in the title. Another match midway down the list is Walking after midnight : one woman’s journey through murder, justice & forgiveness by Katy Hutchison; it has a chapter titled "Yes, we have no bananas." I think few students are going to want to cull through 40 matches, but that is better than the several hundred which a Simple Search for Latino Culture brings up.
Advanced Search allows for searching within the subject field which gives much better results, but by title. To actually browse by subject, the user must select a matching title, then expand to the full record, then click on the Subject heading that matches what they are searching for. It takes about three clicks to get to where you can actually browse and then there is no Search box to refine or further browse; you have to either go with "previous" or "next" buttons to browse the subjects. I find myself adapting and the user probably will too, but I still think the ability to browse subjects and authors should be there.
I understand the desire to simplify. However, I think sometimes we underestimate the users and eliminate functionality that some use or would use if taught. I hear librarians say "but, they don't use it." Then, teach them.
Currently, I use the OPAC rather than the ILS client to search for titles currently held (title searching), authors (author browsing), and to see what we have in various subject areas (subject browsing). What is currently being re-done, with Google-like visions, is the Simple Search. Sadly, this is where the current browse feature resides. The new simple search will be one search option only (Catalog Search) and that is over the entire record. Advanced search is still there, but it does not have the option to browse. So, when the OPAC is rolled out (unless they change it based on feedback and I did give feedback), users will no longer have the ability to browse subjects or authors.
I was aghast. It's second nature to me to subject browse and always has been, even before I became a librarian. Maybe it's because I learned to do research with a card catalog and print indexes. These force you to think in terms of subject. When I worked the reference desk and a student wanted information on a particular subject, I showed them how to do a subject search and most were quite pleased when they learned they could could search this way.
Bananas is a search I recently did, but I was looking for titles related to the banana trade, marketing, economic factors, etc. A search in the "Simple Search" box for bananas, netted 40 hits. Not overwhelming. Near the top of the list is Language, bananas and bonobos : linguistic problems, puzzles and polemics by Neil Smith; the only assigned subject is Linguistics. Bananas is simply in the title. Another match midway down the list is Walking after midnight : one woman’s journey through murder, justice & forgiveness by Katy Hutchison; it has a chapter titled "Yes, we have no bananas." I think few students are going to want to cull through 40 matches, but that is better than the several hundred which a Simple Search for Latino Culture brings up.
Advanced Search allows for searching within the subject field which gives much better results, but by title. To actually browse by subject, the user must select a matching title, then expand to the full record, then click on the Subject heading that matches what they are searching for. It takes about three clicks to get to where you can actually browse and then there is no Search box to refine or further browse; you have to either go with "previous" or "next" buttons to browse the subjects. I find myself adapting and the user probably will too, but I still think the ability to browse subjects and authors should be there.
I understand the desire to simplify. However, I think sometimes we underestimate the users and eliminate functionality that some use or would use if taught. I hear librarians say "but, they don't use it." Then, teach them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)