Our own studies at the National Library of Wales, on Geac, VTLS, TLC and
AquaBrowser OPACs (not just ours, but some other libraries') showed that
our users (a) assume automatically that any search they do is a KW
search, even if the text-entry box is labelled "browse", and (b) simply
don't understand the concept of browsing as applied to a library
catalogue. To them, browsing a catalogue is like browsing in a clothing
shop: they don't expect headings as a result of a browse search, they
expect individual catalogue records, like shirts on a rack, and when a
browse search throws up a list of headings they are simply flummoxed. It
takes a deal of explaining to them to get them to understand what *we*
mean by the term.
To my mind, anything that needs that kind of explaining doesn't belong
at the top table of an OPAC designed for the public. By all means
include a browse function, but don't stick it where unwarry ordinary
patrons can get at it by mistake. Maybe things are different in other
countries, and our own staff certainly do want to have access to a
browse capability, but we've decided to 'hide' the browse function of
our new OPAC away from its front page, out of harm's way.
A second objection I have to browsing may not apply to all libraries,
but when browsing "Doe, John" throws up 30 or more different author
headings for him, many of them not author-title headings but simply
variants of the author heading differentiated solely by punctuation,
extra spaces, inclusion or not of middle initials, or different ways of
displaying birth and death dates, caused by the vagaries of cataloguing
rules changes over many decades as well as rogue cataloguer
inconsistencies, and these headings each have to be searched
individually (i.e., there's no way of ticking off all the relevant ones
and then combining them in a single merged display of individual
catalogue records), it's a near-criminal waste of users' time. I know
this isn't a problem with the principle of browse searching, but it sure
is a problem of one-the-ground browsing.
Roger Fenton
Jane Myers wrote:
> Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
>
>>
>> But I liked to think that displaying an a-z index at the
>> position where your term should be sitting, that might just
>> sometimes be helpful. Which led me to think it might be a useful
>> feature of NG catalogs. Lack of support in this forum seems to
>> indicate otherwise. So be it, to the relief of all those SQLers
>> out there who can never figure it out and who seem to think that
>> "No results found" or whatever is good enough.
>>
> I certainly hope that the perceived lack of support is actually the
> result of everyone assuming we can't do without it (a browseable list),
> that it doesn't need to be stressed. I am strongly in favor of
> browsing. I would never do away with key word searching, it's a handy
> tool. But both browsing and key word searching are important tools and
> I want both of them.
>
> Jane Myers, Cataloger
> Westlake Porter Public Library
> Westlake, Ohio
--
Roger Fenton
Swyddog Prosiect
Adran Gwasanaethau Casgliadau
Is-adran Systemau
Llyfrgell Genedlaethol Cymru
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion SY23 3BU
Cymru
http://www.llgc.org.uk/
Ffôn: +44 (0) 1970 632800 est. 368
e-bost: roger.fenton_at_llgc.org.uk
Dydy'r uchod ddim o reidrwydd yn cynrychioli polisi'r LlGC
Project Officer
Department of Collection Services
Systems Section
National Library of Wales
Aberystwyth, Ceredigion SY23 3BU
Wales
http://www.llgc.org.uk/
Tel.: +44 (0) 1970 632800 ext. 368
Fax: +44 (0) 1970 632882
e-mail: roger.fenton_at_llgc.org.uk
The above does not necessarily represent NLW policy
Received on Mon Jun 26 2006 - 10:00:46 EDT