Dave Pattern

4,070 views

Published on

Published in: Technology

Dave Pattern

  1. 1. OPAC 2.0 Teaching the Pig to Sing Continuing impact of Web 2.0 on library catalogues Dave Pattern, Library Systems Manager University of Huddersfield, UK [email_address]
  2. 2. preamble <ul><li>Presentation available at: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>www.slideshare.net/daveyp </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Please remix and reuse this presentation! </li></ul><ul><ul><li>creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. table of contents <ul><li>Does your OPAC “suck”? </li></ul><ul><li>2007 OPAC survey </li></ul><ul><li>Experiences at Huddersfield </li></ul><ul><li>Other libraries </li></ul><ul><li>Web services </li></ul><ul><li>OPAC 2.0 </li></ul>
  4. 4. does your OPAC “suck”?
  5. 5. “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>
  6. 7. 2007 OPAC survey <ul><li>On a scale of 1 to 10 (where 1 is extremely unhappy and 10 is extremely happy), how happy are you with your OPAC? </li></ul><ul><li>5.1 </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
  7. 8. 2007 OPAC survey <ul><li>One criticism of OPACs is that they rarely have cutting edge features that our users expect from a modern web site. </li></ul><ul><li>On a scale of 1 to 10, how well do you think your OPAC meets the needs and expectations of your users? </li></ul><ul><li>4.5 </li></ul>
  8. 9. the OPAC as a “pig” <ul><li>“After all, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still very much a pig.” (Roy Tennant discussing library OPACs, Library Journal , 2005) </li></ul><ul><li>“Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig.” (attrib. Robert Heinlein, author) </li></ul>
  9. 10. pig ugly?
  10. 11. “kissy, kissy?”
  11. 13. experiences at Huddersfield <ul><li>Definitely not OPAC 2.0 </li></ul><ul><li>Enhancements to the existing OPAC </li></ul><ul><ul><li>user suggestions from surveys </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ 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><ul><li>Required staff buy-in and a willingness to experiment and take risks! </li></ul>
  12. 14. spell checker <ul><li>All OPAC keyword searches were monitored over a six month period </li></ul><ul><li>Approx 23% of searches gave zero results </li></ul><ul><ul><li>74 people entered “renew” as a keyword </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Users expect suggestions and prompts, not “dead end” pages </li></ul>
  13. 15. spell checker
  14. 16. keyword suggestions (1) <ul><li>Failed keyword searches are cross referenced with answers.com and Wikipedia to provide new search suggestions </li></ul>
  15. 17. keyword suggestions (2)
  16. 18. keyword suggestions (2) <ul><li>Is this suggestion inappropriate? </li></ul>
  17. 19. borrowing suggestions
  18. 20. personalised suggestions
  19. 21. ratings and comments
  20. 22. links to other editions <ul><li>Uses FRBR-like web services provided by OCLC and LibraryThing to locate other editions and related works within local holdings </li></ul><ul><ul><li>www.oclc.org/research/projects/xisbn/ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>www.librarything.com/api </li></ul></ul>
  21. 23. other editions
  22. 24. email alerts
  23. 25. RSS feeds
  24. 26. RSS feeds
  25. 27. keyword cloud
  26. 28. was it worth doing?
  27. 29. was it worth doing? <ul><li>376 active email alerts </li></ul><ul><li>113 active RSS feeds </li></ul><ul><li>846 ratings </li></ul><ul><li>53 comments </li></ul><ul><li>personalised suggestions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>116 clicks per month (average) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>combined keyword suggestions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>753 clicks per month (average) </li></ul></ul>
  28. 30. other libraries
  29. 31. Ann Arbor District Library
  30. 33. North Carolina State University
  31. 34. LibraryThing for Libraries
  32. 35. Plymouth State University
  33. 36. Topeka and Shawnee County
  34. 37. University of Warwick
  35. 38. Hennepin County Library
  36. 39. lipstick on the pig <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 Amazon.com, 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.” (Roy Tennant, Library Journal , 2005) </li></ul>
  37. 40. doing it yourself <ul><li>Encourage suggestions from staff </li></ul><ul><li>Include users in decision making process </li></ul><ul><li>Encourage play and experimentation </li></ul><ul><li>Don’t be afraid to make mistakes! </li></ul><ul><li>Look widely for ideas </li></ul><ul><li>“Build crappy prototypes fast” </li></ul><ul><li>Monitor usage </li></ul><ul><ul><li>if usage is poor, rethink it or get rid of it </li></ul></ul>
  38. 41. Open Source OPACs <ul><li>Scriblio </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Plymouth State University </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>uses WordPress blog software </li></ul></ul><ul><li>VuFind </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Falvey Memorial Library, Villanova University </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>uses PHP & MySQL </li></ul></ul><ul><li>LibraryFind </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Oregon State University Libraries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>uses Ruby on Rails </li></ul></ul>
  39. 42. Open Source OPACs <ul><li>fac-back-opac </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Laurentian University Library </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>uses Lucene & Solr </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Project Blacklight </li></ul><ul><ul><li>University of Virginia Libraries </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>uses Lucene & Solr </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Open Source LMS </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Koha </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Evergreen </li></ul></ul>
  40. 43. VuFind
  41. 44. fac-back-opac
  42. 45. web services & APIs <ul><li>Talis Platform </li></ul><ul><li>LibraryThing </li></ul><ul><ul><li>thingISBN, thingTitle, thingLang, data feeds </li></ul></ul><ul><li>OCLC WorldCat Grid Services </li></ul><ul><li>Amazon Web Services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>recently rebranded as “Amazon Associates Web Service” with new conditions of use </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Google Book Search API </li></ul>
  43. 46. Amazon Associates Web Service <ul><li>Cover scans, reviews, recommendations, sales commission, etc </li></ul><ul><li>Already used by many libraries </li></ul><ul><li>However, recent change to conditions of use (19/Mar/2008) may preclude libraries: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>5.1.3. You are not permitted to use Amazon Associates Web Service with any Application or for any use that does not have, as its principal purpose, driving traffic to the Amazon Website and driving sales of products and services on the Amazon Website. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>( AWS Customer Agreement ) </li></ul></ul>
  44. 47. Google Book Search API <ul><li>Launched 13/Mar/2008 </li></ul><ul><li>Typically client-side implementation (rather than server-side) </li></ul><ul><li>Link to GBS content: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>via ISBN, LCCNs, and OCLC numbers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>front cover thumnails </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>preview pages </li></ul></ul>
  45. 48. the traditional vendors <ul><li>Talis Platform </li></ul><ul><li>Ex Libris “Primo” </li></ul><ul><li>Innovative Interfaces “Encore” </li></ul><ul><li>SirsiDynix “Enterprise” </li></ul><ul><li>Bowker “ AquaBrowser ” </li></ul>
  46. 49. Ex Libris “Primo”
  47. 50. Innovative Interfaces “Encore”
  48. 51. SirsiDynix “Enterprise”
  49. 52. Bowker “AquaBrowser”
  50. 53. play and experimentation
  51. 54. it’s okay to play! <ul><li>“We don’t stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>attrib: George Bernard Shaw </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2007 Library & Information Show Workshop on Library 2.0 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Q: I don’t get paid to play, I get paid to work </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>A: So, don’t call it “play”, call it “professional development” </li></ul></ul>
  52. 55. admit it, haven’t you wanted to do this in your library…
  53. 56. Huddersfield Public Library
  54. 57. somewhere over the rainbow?
  55. 58. never judge a book by it’s cover <ul><li>“ I borrowed a book 3 years ago that had an orange cover… can I borrow it again?” </li></ul>
  56. 59. Keyword search visualisations
  57. 60. eye candy
  58. 61. OPAC 2.0
  59. 62. OPAC 2.0 <ul><li>“The best way to predict the future is to invent it.” </li></ul><ul><li>(Alan Kay, computer scientist and former Xerox PARC researcher) </li></ul><ul><li>“The future is here. It's just not widely distributed yet.” </li></ul><ul><li>(William Gibson, science fiction author and creator of the word “cyberspace”) </li></ul>
  60. 63. OPAC 2.0 <ul><li>shopping list of features: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>spell checking (“did you mean?”) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>search all library resources (including e-resources) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>single search box (like Google) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>relevancy ranking, search refining, and facets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>manual recommendations (“best bets”) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>automated suggestions (based on both global and user-specific data) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>user participation (“read-write OPAC” – tagging, comments, reviews, etc) </li></ul></ul>
  61. 64. OPAC 2.0 <ul><li>shopping list of features: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>improve serendipity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>expose hidden links between items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>APIs and Web Services to expose data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>promote unintended uses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>high degree of user personalisation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>embed external data (e.g. Wikipedia, LibraryThing) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>foster communities of interest </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS feeds and OpenSearch </li></ul></ul>
  62. 65. 2007 OPAC Survey – Features <ul><li>Please rate how important you feel the following features are to your users in a modern OPAC. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>embedding the OPAC in external sites (e.g. portals) 8.7 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ did you mean” spelling suggestions 8.6 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>enriched content (book covers, ToCs, etc) 8.4 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>RSS feeds (e.g. new books, searches, etc) 7.8 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>facetted browsing (e.g. like NCSU Library) 7.4 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ people who borrowed this” suggestions 6.5 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>user tagging of items (i.e. folksonomy) 6.1 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>user added comments and reviews 6.0 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>personalised suggestions (e.g. like Amazon) 5.9 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>user added ratings for items 5.7 </li></ul></ul>
  63. 66. implementation of features
  64. 67. features – future trends?
  65. 68. feature importance
  66. 69. technology adoption lifecycle
  67. 70. technology adoption – 2007
  68. 71. technology adoption – now?
  69. 72. importance – UK respondents
  70. 73. thank you!

×