Glasgow: OPAC 2.0 and Beyond


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • blog links:
  • 2009 value is predicted
  • 2009 value is predicted
  • Glasgow: OPAC 2.0 and Beyond

    1. 1. OPAC 2.0 and Beyond! …to boldly go where no library has gone before Dave Pattern Library Systems Manager University of Huddersfield, UK [email_address]
    2. 2. Preamble <ul><li>Presentation available at: </li></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Please remix and reuse this presentation </li></ul><ul><ul><li> </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Have you remembered to switch your phone on? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>please feel free to take photos, record audio, blog, tweet (@daveyp), etc </li></ul></ul>
    3. 3. Contents <ul><li>Before the OPAC </li></ul><ul><li>OPAC 1.0 </li></ul><ul><li>OPAC 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Beyond the OPAC </li></ul>
    4. 4. Once upon a time…
    5. 5. Warning! The following slides may contain library pornography…
    6. 6.
    7. 7.
    8. 8.
    9. 9.
    10. 10.
    11. 11.
    12. 12.
    13. 13.
    14. 14.
    15. 15. The 1980s…
    16. 16.
    17. 18. The 1990s…
    18. 19. Library Hi Tech Journal, 2002
    19. 20. Library Hi Tech Journal, 2002
    20. 22. The 21 st Century…
    21. 23. MARC21 <ul><li>“Designed to redefine the original MARC record format for the 21st century…” </li></ul><ul><li>…and yet, the primary purpose of the complex punctuation rules in MARC21 seems to be to ensure that you can still produce perfect printed catalogue cards! Conspiracy theory #1 </li></ul>
    22. 24. What we think our users want…
    23. 37. Conspiracy Theory #2 <ul><li>Why are we trying to turn our users into little mini librarians? </li></ul><ul><li>“ Thou shalt not use yonder library until thou hast understanding of...” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Dewey Classification </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Shelfmarks & Shelf Order </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Boolean Logic and Advanced Set Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the difference between accruing & outstanding fines </li></ul></ul>
    24. 38. What our users want expect…
    25. 40. S. R. Ranganathan <ul><li>Five laws of library science (1931) </li></ul><ul><li>4th Law: Save the time of the Reader </li></ul><ul><li>“… if readers find what they are looking for in a timely manner they will be more satisfied, and more likely to feel like their needs have been met.” </li></ul>ENLITE Journal, circa 1969
    26. 41. With hindsight…
    27. 42. Where did it all go wrong? <ul><li>Just an online card catalogue? </li></ul><ul><li>Just a stock inventory system? </li></ul><ul><li>Poor search & refine functionality <sarcasm> …but, aren’t librarians supposed to be experts on “search”? ;-) </sarcasm> </li></ul>
    28. 43. Roy Tennant Library Journal, 2005 <ul><li>“ I wish I had known that the solution for needing to teach our users how to search our catalog was to create a system that didn't need to be taught … I wish I had known that we would come to pay the price of our folly by seeing our users flock to commercial companies like Google and Amazon.” </li></ul>
    29. 44. Does your OPAC suck?
    30. 46. “The OPAC Sucks” song <ul><li>The OPAC sucks, that's all I gotta say </li></ul><ul><li>You're outta luck if you can't spell “Hemingway” </li></ul><ul><li>... </li></ul><ul><li>The OPAC sucks, a sad calamity </li></ul><ul><li>Like it's stuck in 8 million B.C. </li></ul><ul><li>The title that I seek </li></ul><ul><li>Is buried very deep </li></ul><ul><li>(lyrics by Brian Smith , Chicago Librarian) </li></ul>
    31. 49. Web 2.0
    32. 50. Ann Arbor District Library
    33. 52. Huddersfield
    34. 53. Background <ul><li>General unhappiness with vendor product </li></ul><ul><li>“In-house” enhancements to the existing OPAC… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>user suggestions from surveys </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“Web 2.0” inspired features </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>borrowing good ideas from other web sites </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>new features launched with no/low publicity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“perpetual beta” </li></ul></ul>
    35. 54. Keyword cloud
    36. 55. Guided keyword searches
    37. 56. Borrowing suggestions
    38. 57. Personalised suggestions
    39. 58. Email alerts
    40. 59. RSS feeds
    41. 60. Virtual shelf browser
    42. 61. Was it worth doing?
    43. 62. Borrowing profile average loans per month average number of book loans per month
    44. 63. Feature usage “people who borrowed this…” average number of clicks per month on “people who borrowed this” suggestions
    45. 64. The impact on borrowing range of stock borrowed per year number of unique titles (bib#) borrowed per calendar year (2009 figure is predicted) borrowing suggestions added to catalogue at start of 2006
    46. 65. The impact on borrowing average number of books borrowed average number of books borrowed per active borrower per calendar year (2009 predicted)
    47. 66. Other libraries
    48. 67. North Carolina State University
    49. 68. Topeka and Shawnee County
    50. 69. University of Warwick
    51. 70. Hennepin County Library
    52. 71. <ul><li>“ We need to focus more energy on important, systemic changes rather than cosmetic ones. If your system is more difficult to search and less effective than, then you have work to do. </li></ul><ul><li>After all, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still very much a pig.” </li></ul>Roy Tennant Library Journal, 2005
    53. 72. OPAC 2.0 (“Next Gen”)
    54. 73. OPAC 2.0 <ul><li>Second generation web OPACs </li></ul><ul><li>Feature list… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>relevancy ranking by default </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>faceted browsing / limiting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ did you mean?” spell checking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS feeds, OpenSearch, etc </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Marking MARC work harder! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>importance of high quality, rich records </li></ul></ul>
    55. 74. OPAC 2.0 <ul><li>However, Web 2.0 seems only to have made a partial impact on OPAC 2.0… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>tagging </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ratings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>reviews </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>social bookmarking </li></ul></ul>
    56. 75. What’s missing from OPAC 2.0? <ul><li>We need more serendipity! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>borrowing suggestions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“just in time” recommendations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social features </li></ul><ul><ul><li>create links between borrowers </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Web services and APIs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>encourage users to remix our data </li></ul></ul>
    57. 76. Commerical products <ul><li>AquaBrowser </li></ul><ul><li>Ex Libris : Primo </li></ul><ul><li>Innovative Interfaces: Encore </li></ul><ul><li>SirsiDynix: Enterprise </li></ul><ul><li>Talis Platform: Prism 3 </li></ul><ul><li>DS: DSArena </li></ul>
    58. 79. Open Source OPACs <ul><li>Scriblio </li></ul><ul><li>VuFind </li></ul><ul><li>LibraryFind </li></ul><ul><li>fac-back-opac </li></ul><ul><li>Project Blacklight </li></ul><ul><li>The Social OPAC </li></ul><ul><li>Open Source LMS - Koha & Evergreen </li></ul>
    59. 80. Beyond the OPAC!
    60. 81. More than just books <ul><li>Single search for multiple silos: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>library stock (books, journals, etc) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>electronic content (ebooks, ejournals, etc) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>digital repositories </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>archive collections </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>multimedia collections (audio, video, photos, etc) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Many users are now format agnostic </li></ul><ul><ul><li>ebooks, journals, podcasts, off-air TV recordings, YouTube videos, blog posts, etc = information </li></ul></ul>
    61. 82. Local indexes <ul><li>Traditional meta-searching too slow </li></ul><ul><li>Local indexes = fast searches </li></ul><ul><li>Serial Solutions: Summon </li></ul><ul><ul><li>web content crawled and indexed in advance </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Some existing products also support local indexes… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Primo, VuFind, LibraryFind, etc </li></ul></ul>
    62. 83. Summon
    63. 84. …and whither the OPAC? <ul><li>Let’s decouple the user front-end from the staff back-end! </li></ul><ul><li>Will the “OPAC” return to just being an inventory of physical stock? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>just one of many silos </li></ul></ul><ul><li>What goes around, comes around… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>give it a few more years and we’ll probably go back to using card catalogues! ;-) </li></ul></ul>
    64. 85. Thank you! …any questions?