I went to Barnes & Noble's website last night to look at the nook.
It's dazzling--both the nook and their website. Facets, customer
reviews, dynamic displays, etc. If I go from that back to most any
public library OPAC, yeah, it makes the library look small and dull. I
agree with Tim--let's at least get libraries to the Web Web first.
Sharon M. Foster, JD, MLS
Technology Librarian
http://firstgentrekkie.blogspot.com/
"Have you tried switching it off and on again?"
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net> wrote:
> Tim Spalding wrote:
>>
>> 2. WorldCat is seldom visited. For example, WorldCat has HALF the
>> traffic of LibraryThing. It even has less traffic than Dogster.com,
>> the social network for people who REALLY love their dogs.
>>
>>
>>
>
> It turns out that WorldCat gets less traffic than Open Library, which is
> still in beta. This surprised me, but your data confirms that WC gets little
> use. (And note that Open Library has links to WC for "find in a library" so
> it sends some traffic to WC.) Yet the whole thing behind OCLC's defense of
> WC is that it will be used to drive traffic to libraries.
>
> There's obviously lots of interest in books, and very active book-related
> sites, but it seems that there is little interest in going to libraries to
> get those books. What if "libraries" looked like LibraryThing to the user?
> (Or GoodReads... or BookMooch...) If libraries were a mashable, social,
> online interaction that just happened to link to items in the local catalog?
> Or is it that the library is just a big, dull institution that people can't
> related to?
>
> kc
>
> --
> -----------------------------------
> Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
> ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
> fx.: 510-848-3913
> mo.: 510-435-8234
> ------------------------------------
>
Received on Fri Oct 23 2009 - 11:04:17 EDT