Re: Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)

Mary points out that users are not coming to reference librarians as
they did in the past.  This is a very important point to take into
account for the catalog.  We have to design the primary search interface
for the user and not for the reference librarian, and users want a
simple search box.  However, the system should have some way to allow
the reference librarian to do more advanced searching when needed, and
to be able to show users how to perform these advanced searches to users
when possible.   I agree that we have to continue to strive to find a
way for the system to better utilize the cataloging data that is
available but still present a the simple interface for the user.  


-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Popp, Mary Pagliero
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 9:52 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)

Of course circulation is a public service--now.  It originally was set
up as inventory control so that we could keep track of where our books
actually were; in the beginning there was no place to show a user that
an item was checked out.  There were no public interfaces; there was
only the card catalog.  And cataloging (as important as it is) is a
public service in that it provides the data that underlies the public
interface.  All the excellent cataloging in the world won't help us if
the interface does not make it easy or intuitive to find that excellent
work.  But that is a digression.  This is not about public vs. technical
services.  What it is about is working together and determining how the
two parts of a system interact.

Michael's second paragraph hits the nail on the head.  More searching
power is exactly what is needed, especially in large databases.  And
while It would be great to give reference librarians more power, most
users don't come to reference librarians as much these days as they
might have done in the past.   What power are we going to give to the
user who wants self-service searching without requiring that user to
learn a lot about how records are constructed?  It is that answer that
should be driving at least some of our discussions.  The fact that OLE
does not provide opportunities for such discussion makes it less likely
to be an effective solution.

Mary
-----------------------------------------------
Mary Pagliero Popp, Public Services Librarian 
Library Information Technology, 
Wells Library W501, Indiana University, 
1320 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN  47405
popp_at_indiana.edu  812-855-8170   FAX: 812-856-4979


-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries
[mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael Fitzgerald
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 10:12 PM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Whose elephant is it, anyway? (the OLE project)

At 09:54 PM 3/10/2009, Mary wrote:
>Throughout the history of the development of automated library systems,

>the back room activities were the driving factors in development. We 
>started with circulation and added back room cataloging.

Oh please - like circulation isn't a public service? Or cataloging? 
The totality of the library serves the public - acquisitions included
(are we acquiring things for staff-only use?). It's a very myopic view
that says that only the OPAC matters to the public. Why should this be
viewed as a divisive tech services vs. public services situation?

I would love to see a library system that gives more power to the
reference librarian so that the public can be better served. Right now,
most of the tools are so poor that cataloging data that has already been
input cannot be easily retrieved and used in the kinds of sophisticated
searches that pinpoint what users need. Too often the reference
librarians on the front lines are forced to throw some keywords at a
search box and they fare about as well as a civilian would, even when
they know in their heads how to do a better search - they are frustrated
by the limitations of the current systems (and who has time to do a
"create lists" kind of search with the patron at the desk?). Thankfully,
we have started to see more MARC data being leveraged in next generation
systems, and hopefully that will mean that cataloging will make use of
more of the appropriate fields instead of ignoring them "because they
don't show up in the OPAC anyway".

It's all connected and as Sharon wrote, it's about good interfaces
between the systems.

Mike

www.crj-online.org
www.jazzdiscography.com