On Jun 7, 2006, at 11:56 PM, Ross Singer wrote:
> Well, the problem here is that I don't generally see titles that are
> available via Project Gutenberg or other freely available items
> (within reason). Why are these not considered 'part of the
> collection'? If a user is searching for a title, and the library
> doesn't have it in print, but it's available in Google Book Search
> (and out of copyright), why wouldn't the 'catalog' show that?
Ross's example gets to another question raised in information
architecture circles -- content.
To over simplify, there are three questions in information
architecture (IA): users, content, and context. Yesterday we
discussed users. Who are our users? Who is our audience? Part of
those same user questions is, "What does the audience want, need, and
expect?" If you don't meet the audience's expressed needs and
expectations, then the audience will not find the information system
useful and a library will loose its support (funding). We didn't get
to that. Some of the many ways these questions can be answered are
through surveys, focus group interviews, log file analysis, antidotal
evidence, etc.
Content is another IA question. What does the information system
contain? This is akin to articulating a collection development
policy. Not even Google provides access to the totality of the
world's content, and there is no reason to expect our information
system to fill this role either. Instead, focus on the answers
regarding users (and context, which we didn't get to either) to
define the scope of your content. Ask yourself, "What are the
strengths of my institution?" "To what degree does my collection need
to be comprehensive, authoritative, up-to-date, written in a
particular language, presented in an aesthetically pleasing manner,
etc?" Remember, you have limited resources and you are not able to
create complete, deep, and broad collections on all topics. Create a
list of guidelines that your information resources need to embody in
order to be a part of your collection. Just because a particular
information resource is about a particular subject does not
necessarily mean it is a good candidate for inclusion. Again, set
priorities.
I assert the items making up the answers to the content question will
include items available beyond your walls. Dewey and Cutter, God rest
their souls, really only had books and journals to deal with.
Information was only physical in nature. It was impractical to list
things available in other libraries because it was impractical to get
those other things.
This thing we call the catalog, in my humble opinion, should be
augmented with content going beyond the things libraries own to
include the things the patrons need/expect but at the same time be
limited by costs, usefulness, the goals of the hosting institution,
format, licensing, the resources of the library creating the
"collection", etc. Your collection can't be all things to all people.
In this vein, I see the information system provided to the patron not
as an inventory control system (a catalog), but more like an
annotated, extra-functional index to the stuff a library thinks is
necessary to help its hosting institution get its work done. This is
a superset of the catalog. Thus, such an index (NOT a metasearch
engine) would include freely available ebooks, articles from open
access journals, electronic theses & dissertations, pre-prints
written by the institution, etc. It would also include encyclopedia
articles, biographies, definitions, images, data sets, standards,
patents, etc, and many of these things I would not necessarily own.
--
Eric "NCG4Lib Now Has 700 Members" Morgan
University Libraries of Notre Dame
(574) 631-8604
I'm hiring a Senior Programmer Analyst.
See http://dewey.library.nd.edu/morgan/programmer/.
Received on Thu Jun 08 2006 - 07:24:08 EDT