> 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.
Speaking of care with terminology, I'd like to see us refer to the ILS user
interface (UI), versus the OPAC. For one thing, it would clarify the
distinctive role of the UI; we keep muddling OPAC and ILS, back-end and
interface. For another, it would help condition us to a user-forward
orientation.
Questions of the ineffable complexity of ILS's aside, a very good question
is how truly complex it is to attach a user-oriented interface to a database
backend. I know that is an extremely reductive question (and that the
complexity of the database will play a big role in the answers), but as a
thinking question... well, food for thought.
Karen G. Schneider
kgs_at_bluehighways.com
Received on Mon Jun 19 2006 - 17:56:23 EDT