Dan, yes, I too think that there might be times when alphabetical order
is useful. The big question (and I don't have an answer) is: when is
alphabetical order the best order for the user? If we have a case where
it is the appropriate order, then we should use it. But before we do
(because it would be very easy to fall into an assumption that
alphabetical order is "best") we should really investigate all of the
options we have for getting the user to the "right stuff." In
particular, alpha order requires some very precise knowledge on the part
of the user (like how to spell a person's name), not to mention that its
usefulness diminishes in very large and very complex lists. And
libraries seem to specialize in that latter case. I remember that filing
in the card catalog at the main library at UC Berkeley was so onerous
that everyone, even the director, put in at least one hour a week as a
show of solidarity for the lower level workers who had to do it as their
main job. As a user of that enormous (multi-lingual) catalog, even as a
library school student, I found it very difficult to navigate even
though "alphabetical order" should be "easy."
The interesting thing about your KWIC example is that the idea that you
put things in order by the "key concept" was actually used in medieval
encyclopedias, according to Prof. Ann Blair, who wrote "Too Much to
Know" about information overload before 1700. That is an interesting
case of a shared world view, because obviously everyone had to have the
same idea of what is the "key concept."
There's an irony with ranked ordering which is that when it works it
greatly satisfies users, but it is not a "known order" and cannot be
understood by the user (and therefore cannot be manipulated by the
user). Ranking is one of the "solutions" to dealing with retrieved sets
that are beyond human scale, but in most cases it is not interactive.
Topic maps and facets give us some interactivity, but I think that it
would be interesting to posit ways that users could understand and
interact with ranking. We sometimes give them the option to sort by date
(earliest, latest), but are there other orders that could be useful?
Most popular (e.g. most library holdings)? Most cited? I dunno, and I'd
love to hear ideas.
kc
On 11/11/12 5:28 AM, Dan Matei wrote:
> Thanks a lot ! Thought provoking ...
>
> I agree with you most of the time. Just on one point I'm not sure...
>
> Call me old fashioned, but I still see some value in the lexicographic ordering.
>
> When my user types "Paris", I want to show him not just the Paris (city in France) page (as Wikipedia does). I'm interested that (s)he sees (on the first screen) some entries "around" Paris
> (France), such as:
>
> Paris (Kentucky, United States)
> Paris (Texas, United States)
> Paris (Greek mythology)
>
> or even:
>
> John of Paris (French theologian)
> Commune of Paris (1871)
> An American in Paris
>
>
>
> Or, maybe, not only alphabetical order, but the good old KWIC ?
>
> Dan
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dan Matei
> director, Direcția Cercetare, Evidență a Patrimoniului Cultural Mobil, Imaterial și Digital [Movable, Intangible and
> Digital Heritage Department] (aka CIMEC)
> Institutul Național al Patrimoniului [National Heritage Institute]
> București [Bucharest, Romania]
> tel. (+4)021 317 90 72; fax (+4)021 317 90 64
> www.cimec.ro
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net>
> To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2012 07:45:52 -0800
> Subject: [NGC4LIB] Video of "Think Different"
>
>> The video of my talk at emtacl12, entitled "Think Different", is now
>> available on Vimeo:
>>
>> http://vimeo.com/user14540364/review/53142026/629c4070c4
>>
>> The talk relates strongly to recent discussions on this list.
>>
>> Links to other emtacl12 videos are here:
>>
>> http://emtacl.com/presentations/
>>
>> It was an excellent conference, and hopefully there will be another one
>> in 2014 (it is settling in to an "every 2 years" schedule).
>>
>> kc
>>
>> --
>> Karen Coyle
>> kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
--
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Sun Nov 11 2012 - 10:29:51 EST