Tim Spalding wrote:
[deletia]
>
> Convinced?
>
> Tim
>
Well, yes and no, Tim. I suppose my problem comes from the
loosey-goosey way we're all throwing around the term 'OPAC'. As one who
has worked with several library systems over the years, OPAC has a very
definite (and limited) meaning as a component of the larger Integrated
Library System (ILS). The OPAC is to me the public interface for
searching, browsing and displaying of items that have records managed by
the ILS. As long as we were talking about this only, I could agree with
you.
But the OPAC is only a piece of the much larger and complex whole that
is an ILS. In many ways -- notwithstanding the fact that everyone loves
to complain about how bad they are -- OPACs are the 'cream' of the ILS.
I've heard more than one programmer describe the OPAC in just such
terms. They are visible and they are relatively easy to write.
I begin to grow somewhat more doubtful when circulation slips into the
picture. Along with other functional modules such as acquisitions,
serials control, cataloguing, ILL, course reserves, etc., circulation is
one of the unglamorous but highly complex back-office functions that in
many ways are the operational heart of the system for which the OPAC is
just a pretty face. These are the pieces nobody likes writing, and in
varying degrees, nobody does them well. While *conceptually* these
functions are largely the same across all libraries regardless of size
or focus, the devil is very much in the details, for the differences of
detail across libraries are almost beyond comprehension. Just allowing
for the intricacies of the circulation policies and patron groups of a
modest public or academic library can keep ILS programmers endlessly
busy. And while some ILS content is governed by standards -- catalogers
and serials control folks have their MARC formats and circulation staff
now have NCIP -- big chunks such as acquisitions and fiscal control are
totally system specific... and incredibly ugly. Indeed, these last two
are frequently so non-standard that it is not all uncommon for ILS
vendors to urge new customers not even to try and bother with converting
such data to their systems.
My point here is not to slam LibraryThing, which I myself use and think
is a great solution for managing and sharing personal libraries over the
web. It might even be extended and adapted for very simple use as an
OPAC stand-in. But I do think we need to exercise some caution about
our excitement and some care with our terminology. LibraryThing, useful
as it is, is nowhere close to being mistaken for an ILS, or even an OPAC
with a reasonably functional circulation module.
Thanks for listening,
- mt
--
*************************************************************************
Marc Truitt
Assistant Dean for Systems Voice : 713-743-8979
University of Houston Libraries e-mail : mtruitt_at_uh.edu
114 University Libraries fax : 713-743-9811
Houston, TX 77204-2000 cell : 713-201-0351
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away...
--Buffalo Springfield
*************************************************************************
Received on Mon Jun 19 2006 - 17:39:34 EDT