On 8/31/07, James Weinheimer <j.weinheimer_at_aur.edu> wrote:
> The opposite case of CS ignoring the experience of library science is just
> as prevalent.
Why? What has LIS got that the rest of the world could benefit from?
> I still say that the old standards of finding resources *consistently and
> reliably* by its authors, titles, and subjects is still what most people
> want.
Hmm. I constantly deal with people who searches that neither of these
three can help me. Why are these three what we should aim for? (Apart
from it being traditional)
> When this can be proven to be done--using scientific methods of expert
> analysis, control groups, and so on--then I will be convinced.
Don't we already do well on title, author and subject searches? *puzzled*
Alex
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
Received on Fri Aug 31 2007 - 17:12:56 EDT