Are we trying to make catalogs into something that they don't really need to be? We constantly hear that Amazon is "the competition." Is it, really? We're not trying to sell books. Libraries are not just books, but space, computer and internet access, services, etc. Is it really such a bad thing that people admit that they use our catalogs to check on local availability? I had an Economics professor insist to me once that the default search in our catalog should be "Author," which certainly suggests a preference for known-item searching, as an earlier poster has observed also.
Ten or so years ago, we were bent out of shape because users were leaving libraries in droves--supposedly evidenced by lowered gate counts--because of the internet. Like the internet generally, Amazon is just another tool out there to help people meet their information needs. Do we feel, professionally, that we have to be the only toolbox in town? Okay, sorry, that metaphor kinda broke down. Similarly, I hear my instruction colleagues drilling into freshman heads the same thing that I did back when I did instruction: "Start your research on the Library's web page, not the open internet!" Why? I certainly don't. Are we, professionally, really so jealous of what we perceive as the competition?
All of that said, I'm certainly not suggesting that we shouldn't adapt and move forward to better serve our users, and I'm really excited about our own impending implementation of a NextGen catalog. I just question what we're so jealous/afraid of, and also who and what we consider competition, and why we spend thousands of dollars and lots of time hand-wringing to try to be something that we don't need to be?
Just thinkin' out loud and ignoring three deadlines... :)
Nina
Nina McHale
Assistant Professor, Web Librarian
Auraria Library
University of Colorado Denver
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Tim Spalding
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2009 6:56 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Personal perspectives on catalog use
> I'm not saying that libraries are superfluous...I'm a big library supporter. I guess I'm saying that library
> catalogs have failed to evolve much over the years. Online catalogs were first developed back when libraries
> were still pretty much the only game in town (or on campus) when it came to information access. And library
> catalogs still seem to reflect that "only game in town" mentality, in an age where many alternatives exist.
One reason this has happened is that the rest of the web is based on
an essentially open model. Most of the content is available for
indexing and linking, and no central institution controls the
metadata. This openness has produced *waves* of innovation and
improvement-the web today is vastly more interesting and better
organized than it was a decade ago. This while library information
systems are stuck about where they were when the web took off.
It is therefore all the more concerning that, as the realization dawns
on all that libraries have missed the boat, and people are bypassing
them in favor of the web, the Guardians of Libraryland are calling for
a decisive turn away from openness-from the very thing that made the
web work.
Sincerely,
Tim
*In effect, Google commands the metadata now, but that was only
possible because there was no central control. Without that, we'd all
be using WebCrawler or Veronica or etc. And if something better came
along, they would no doubt lose their position.
Received on Fri Feb 13 2009 - 00:50:06 EST